How a Leader Responds to Americans Threatened

[toomuchtime_]

I did not realize you were an even bigger isolationist than Trump.

Have you ever been out of the country?

Since when was Trump?

I want us to start minding our own business. If it takes bringing everyone home, that's what it takes. When we start minding our own business we don't have issues like this at an embassy.

Would we allow other countries to have military personal all over our country? No, so why do we expect others to simply accept it?

So you are angry at Obama for sending US forces back to Iraq to rescue Iraq from ISIS, because it was really none of our business.

We armed and funded ISIS. What's the point? We had an agreement with Iraq. Yes, Obama should have honored that agreement.

We didn't arm and fund ISIS and we were asked by Iraq to rescue them from ISIS but you say we should have minded our own business, so you must be angry at Obama for getting us involved in that fight, right?

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

 

[White 6]

MAGA.

Too bad the previous POS Obama and Hillary clown show went to bed instead.

I wish a Crises response team had been set up prior to Benghazi, so I would not have to keep hear right wing bullshit about it, but it wasn't.

100 Marines from Crisis Response Unit Sent to Secure US Embassy in Iraq
The Marines are assigned to Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force-Crisis Response-Central Command, a ground-based unit spread across the Middle East, U.S. officials confirmed to Military.com. Video footage taken near the embassy shows some of the Marines arriving in Baghdad by helicopter.

The California-based 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, is the infantry unit currently assigned to the crisis response task force. The unit -- one of several the Marine Corps created following the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. post in Benghazi, Libya -- not only includes ground forces, but also air and logistics capabilities.

 

[pknopp]

Since when was Trump?

I want us to start minding our own business. If it takes bringing everyone home, that's what it takes. When we start minding our own business we don't have issues like this at an embassy.

Would we allow other countries to have military personal all over our country? No, so why do we expect others to simply accept it?

So you are angry at Obama for sending US forces back to Iraq to rescue Iraq from ISIS, because it was really none of our business.

We armed and funded ISIS. What's the point? We had an agreement with Iraq. Yes, Obama should have honored that agreement.

We didn't arm and fund ISIS and we were asked by Iraq to rescue them from ISIS but you say we should have minded our own business, so you must be angry at Obama for getting us involved in that fight, right?

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

 

[toomuchtime_]

MAGA.

Too bad the previous POS Obama and Hillary clown show went to bed instead.

I wish a Crises response team had been set up prior to Benghazi, so I would not have to keep hear right wing bullshit about it, but it wasn't.

100 Marines from Crisis Response Unit Sent to Secure US Embassy in Iraq
The Marines are assigned to Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force-Crisis Response-Central Command, a ground-based unit spread across the Middle East, U.S. officials confirmed to Military.com. Video footage taken near the embassy shows some of the Marines arriving in Baghdad by helicopter.

The California-based 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, is the infantry unit currently assigned to the crisis response task force. The unit -- one of several the Marine Corps created following the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. post in Benghazi, Libya -- not only includes ground forces, but also air and logistics capabilities.

It wouldn't have made any difference in Benghazi. The closest US forces that could have relieved Benghazi were 7 hours away in Germany despite a deluge of emails from the ambassador telling Clinton that they were in danger and because after the attack was in progress, Clinton waited hours before sending any help. Our problem was not with the military, but the fact we had one of the most incompetent people in the universe running our state department and an absolutely clueless president in the WH.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So you are angry at Obama for sending US forces back to Iraq to rescue Iraq from ISIS, because it was really none of our business.

We armed and funded ISIS. What's the point? We had an agreement with Iraq. Yes, Obama should have honored that agreement.

We didn't arm and fund ISIS and we were asked by Iraq to rescue them from ISIS but you say we should have minded our own business, so you must be angry at Obama for getting us involved in that fight, right?

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

 

[pknopp]

We armed and funded ISIS. What's the point? We had an agreement with Iraq. Yes, Obama should have honored that agreement.

We didn't arm and fund ISIS and we were asked by Iraq to rescue them from ISIS but you say we should have minded our own business, so you must be angry at Obama for getting us involved in that fight, right?

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

 

[toomuchtime_]

We didn't arm and fund ISIS and we were asked by Iraq to rescue them from ISIS but you say we should have minded our own business, so you must be angry at Obama for getting us involved in that fight, right?

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

What is it that you imagine happens every time? That they end up in the hands of ISIS? Pretty much all the "facts" you alleged are untrue yet all your opinions are based on them, doesn't that give you pause?

 

[pknopp]

I bet I have answered this 20 times already. YES!!!!!!

Who do you think got the arms we were running through Benghazi? (I've posted the link already also)

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

What is it that you imagine happens every time? That they end up in the hands of ISIS? Pretty much all the "facts" you alleged are untrue yet all your opinions are based on them, doesn't that give you pause?

Nothing I've said was untrue. We armed ISIS. You want to parse how it was that we armed them but that is irrelevant. We armed them.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You appear to be deeply confused. ISIS is what al Qaeda morphed into after Obama pulled US troops out of Iraq to prepare for his 2012 election campaign. The US had no part in arming or training them. When Obama pulled US funding for for the Sunni militia the that had been fighting al Qaeda, al Qaeda grew strong again and morphed into ISIS, and proceeded to capture half of Iraq and much of Syria, but you believe that was none of or business - despite the fact that Obama's politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq is what created ISIS - so you must be furious at Obama for sending US troops back to Iraq to clean up the mess he had created, right?

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

What is it that you imagine happens every time? That they end up in the hands of ISIS? Pretty much all the "facts" you alleged are untrue yet all your opinions are based on them, doesn't that give you pause?

Nothing I've said was untrue. We armed ISIS. You want to parse how it was that we armed them but that is irrelevant. We armed them.

lol That's just crazy. We never armed ISIS. They capture arms from various countries. What you are actually claiming is that Obama armed ISIS so why are you so reluctant to criticize him for all the things you are claiming he did wrong?

 

[BS Filter]

They are but they are not defending us. Its odd at how many have defended those who were arming people that used those arms against our soldiers though.

The people at the embassy are just State Dept people doing their jobs, they do not care about the politics, most did not ask for that assignment.

We have an obligation to keep them safe. And Trump made sure that happened, and for that he gets all the credit in the world.

I simply noted that there is no reason for them to be there. None of this happens if we do the right thing.

So you're saying the USA shouldn't have an embassy in Iraq?

 

[pknopp]

We backed the "Rebels" in Syria. We ran arms to them out of Benghazi. Those "rebels" were ISIS.

Study shows US weapons given to Syrian rebels ended up in ISIS hands

We try and pretend they are not the same but they are. Even if you want to argue they are not the same they all work together.

We backed Saddam and provided him arms and chemical weapons. How did that turn out?

We backed OBL and Al Queda in Afghanistan. How did that turn out?

We armed "the rebels" in Syria. How did that turn out?

Why are we not able to learn this lesson?

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

What is it that you imagine happens every time? That they end up in the hands of ISIS? Pretty much all the "facts" you alleged are untrue yet all your opinions are based on them, doesn't that give you pause?

Nothing I've said was untrue. We armed ISIS. You want to parse how it was that we armed them but that is irrelevant. We armed them.

lol That's just crazy. We never armed ISIS. They capture arms from various countries. What you are actually claiming is that Obama armed ISIS so why are you so reluctant to criticize him for all the things you are claiming he did wrong?

How about you read what I've wrote so I do not have to repeat myself over and over and over and over.

I hate when someone comes in late and thinks covering the same crap that has been covered already is making a point.

 

[pknopp]

They are but they are not defending us. Its odd at how many have defended those who were arming people that used those arms against our soldiers though.

The people at the embassy are just State Dept people doing their jobs, they do not care about the politics, most did not ask for that assignment.

We have an obligation to keep them safe. And Trump made sure that happened, and for that he gets all the credit in the world.

I simply noted that there is no reason for them to be there. None of this happens if we do the right thing.

So you're saying the USA shouldn't have an embassy in Iraq?

Ditto the above. I have answered this question 3-4 times already.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Wrong on all counts. ISIS captured US weapons from other parties we supported in Syria, so we never funded or trained ISIS as you had previously claimed. The US never supplied any weapons to Saddam. He was supplied by Russia and France but never by the US. We never supplied chemical weapons to Saddam. We had previously sent some anthrax Iraq had requested for agricultural research, but we never shared technology on how to weaponize it.

We backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan but we never backed al Qaeda.

I agree with you that Obama completely screwed up in Syria. Back in 2012, Assad was limping toward defeat, and a strong move by the US would gotten him out before Russia and Iran could have taken over, and for just a moment he seemed to show a small spark of courage but then lost it and created an impossible mess in Syria that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and made millions homeless refugees.

You can argue "they captured them" if you want even but it does NOT make for a better argument. We should NEVER ship arms all over the middle East that we have no control over.

This is what happens every time. When will we learn?

What is it that you imagine happens every time? That they end up in the hands of ISIS? Pretty much all the "facts" you alleged are untrue yet all your opinions are based on them, doesn't that give you pause?

Nothing I've said was untrue. We armed ISIS. You want to parse how it was that we armed them but that is irrelevant. We armed them.

lol That's just crazy. We never armed ISIS. They capture arms from various countries. What you are actually claiming is that Obama armed ISIS so why are you so reluctant to criticize him for all the things you are claiming he did wrong?

How about you read what I've wrote so I do not have to repeat myself over and over and over and over.

I hate when someone comes in late and thinks covering the same crap that has been covered already is making a point.

Actually, what you hate is being held to a standard of truth. You want to complain about the America, but you have no facts, so you invent them, and when you are challenged on your "facts" you pretend you have already proved them. The fact is, you haven't made an honest statement about anything yet on this thread, yet you have strong opinions based on nothing. If you are not interested enough in the issues to learn something about them why bother coming on here in the first place?

 

[White 6]

MAGA.

Too bad the previous POS Obama and Hillary clown show went to bed instead.

I wish a Crises response team had been set up prior to Benghazi, so I would not have to keep hear right wing bullshit about it, but it wasn't.

100 Marines from Crisis Response Unit Sent to Secure US Embassy in Iraq
The Marines are assigned to Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force-Crisis Response-Central Command, a ground-based unit spread across the Middle East, U.S. officials confirmed to Military.com. Video footage taken near the embassy shows some of the Marines arriving in Baghdad by helicopter.

The California-based 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, is the infantry unit currently assigned to the crisis response task force. The unit -- one of several the Marine Corps created following the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. post in Benghazi, Libya -- not only includes ground forces, but also air and logistics capabilities.

It wouldn't have made any difference in Benghazi. The closest US forces that could have relieved Benghazi were 7 hours away in Germany despite a deluge of emails from the ambassador telling Clinton that they were in danger and because after the attack was in progress, Clinton waited hours before sending any help. Our problem was not with the military, but the fact we had one of the most incompetent people in the universe running our state department and an absolutely clueless president in the WH.

Our primary response problem was not having prior military support set up in the middle east. I would not trust Hillary Rodham Clinton to be in charge of any military planning, contingency or otherwise. Her actual utter failure was not response. It was (1) having our Ambassador in Benghazi in the first place, instead of in Tripoli at the American Embassy. (2) Utter failure to responded to repeated information and knowledge of the attack(s) on that compound months before. (3) She refused to listen to our Ambassador when he requested to pull his people out of what he described as an untenable security situation at that compound. Mind you, If I had been the Ambassador, I would have put them on a plane out weeks before, and taken a job in the private sector. Embassies are protected by Marines, consulates are not, and consulate personnel are not military personnel. We don't hire them to die in place at the whim of their boss. Last, but not least (4) She lied like the POS she is in the cover up of her stupidity and to weasel out of her culpability in the death of our Ambassador and injuries of State Department personnel on site. I do not particularly fault her response that night. We did not have a force close enough, properly equipped, and with required mobility to make a difference in time. Now there is. It was put into place after the Benghazi attack. I am frankly surprised she had the stomach to watch what her misjudgment had done. Getting drunk afterwords was the most intelligent thing she had done in months.

 

[Circe]

View attachment 297769

The difference between a leader and a community organizer.

Yeah, really. The fact that Trump was not repeating Benghazi was my very first thought on seeing the news on Reuters that morning. Looks like a lot of people also thought of that contrast.

 

[toomuchtime_]

MAGA.

Too bad the previous POS Obama and Hillary clown show went to bed instead.

I wish a Crises response team had been set up prior to Benghazi, so I would not have to keep hear right wing bullshit about it, but it wasn't.

100 Marines from Crisis Response Unit Sent to Secure US Embassy in Iraq
The Marines are assigned to Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force-Crisis Response-Central Command, a ground-based unit spread across the Middle East, U.S. officials confirmed to Military.com. Video footage taken near the embassy shows some of the Marines arriving in Baghdad by helicopter.

The California-based 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, is the infantry unit currently assigned to the crisis response task force. The unit -- one of several the Marine Corps created following the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. post in Benghazi, Libya -- not only includes ground forces, but also air and logistics capabilities.

It wouldn't have made any difference in Benghazi. The closest US forces that could have relieved Benghazi were 7 hours away in Germany despite a deluge of emails from the ambassador telling Clinton that they were in danger and because after the attack was in progress, Clinton waited hours before sending any help. Our problem was not with the military, but the fact we had one of the most incompetent people in the universe running our state department and an absolutely clueless president in the WH.

Our primary response problem was not having prior military support set up in the middle east. I would not trust Hillary Rodham Clinton to be in charge of any military planning, contingency or otherwise. Her actual utter failure was not response. It was (1) having our Ambassador in Benghazi in the first place, instead of in Tripoli at the American Embassy. (2) Utter failure to responded to repeated information and knowledge of the attack(s) on that compound months before. (3) She refused to listen to our Ambassador when he requested to pull his people out of what he described as an untenable security situation at that compound. Mind you, If I had been the Ambassador, I would have put them on a plane out weeks before, and taken a job in the private sector. Embassies are protected by Marines, consulates are not, and consulate personnel are not military personnel. We don't hire them to die in place at the whim of their boss. Last, but not least (4) She lied like the POS she is in the cover up of her stupidity and to weasel out of her culpability in the death of our Ambassador and injuries of State Department personnel on site. I do not particularly fault her response that night. We did not have a force close enough, properly equipped, and with required mobility to make a difference in time. Now there is. It was put into place after the Benghazi attack. I am frankly surprised she had the stomach to watch what her misjudgment had done. Getting drunk afterwords was the most intelligent thing she had done in months.

I agree completely.

 

[Circe]

Embassies aren’t military installations.

That one is.

Never mind, get our people out, vite. Thousands of people mobbing a building -- nothing can stop that, not realistically. Nothing ever has.

Yeah, I know we could mow them down with machine guns, and history shows many examples of that (Champs de Mars, French Revolution; St. Petersburg Peasants March in 2005 Russia,, many other examples, such as the Boston Massacre). History also show that every single time, the government in place is then quickly overthrown.

So ---- bad move. Let's don't do that. I mean, I'd love it, but. Counterproductive.

 

[Circe]

It occurs to me --- I've been expecting Hillary to pop up like a scary Jack-in-the-box to be drafted, because the Dem candidates currently are so hopeless --- but this event reminding everyone of how she just let our ambassador and his defenders all die as they called and called for help, with no interest in what happened to them ---

I sure hope she doesn't surface again. She did a shameful thing about Benghazi, I know it was supposed to be really Obama, but it was her, and I don't want to see her around anymore. I'm ashamed of her.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Embassies aren’t military installations.

That one is.

Never mind, get our people out, vite. Thousands of people mobbing a building -- nothing can stop that, not realistically. Nothing ever has.

Yeah, I know we could mow them down with machine guns, and history shows many examples of that (Champs de Mars, French Revolution; St. Petersburg Peasants March in 2005 Russia,, many other examples, such as the Boston Massacre). History also show that every single time, the government in place is then quickly overthrown.

So ---- bad move. Let's don't do that. I mean, I'd love it, but. Counterproductive.

Of course they can be stopped whether they are armed or not. If they are not armed, limited access to the building forces them to congregate in close quarters making the vulnerable to various non lethal remedies, and if they are armed, Apache gunships, fighter planes,etc. would quickly clear them out. Security at the embassy was lax because Iraqi special forces were supposed to be guarding the perimeter of the Green Zone, but they failed to act to stop the militia.

 

[pknopp]

Embassies aren’t military installations.

That one is.

Never mind, get our people out, vite. Thousands of people mobbing a building -- nothing can stop that, not realistically. Nothing ever has.

Yeah, I know we could mow them down with machine guns, and history shows many examples of that (Champs de Mars, French Revolution; St. Petersburg Peasants March in 2005 Russia,, many other examples, such as the Boston Massacre). History also show that every single time, the government in place is then quickly overthrown.

So ---- bad move. Let's don't do that. I mean, I'd love it, but. Counterproductive.

Of course they can be stopped whether they are armed or not. If they are not armed, limited access to the building forces them to congregate in close quarters making the vulnerable to various non lethal remedies, and if they are armed, Apache gunships, fighter planes,etc. would quickly clear them out. Security at the embassy was lax because Iraqi special forces were supposed to be guarding the perimeter of the Green Zone, but they failed to act to stop the militia.

Iraq has no special forces. It's why we are still there. Iraq is not interested in fighting this war.