Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe
Just my opinion. But we probably had an agreement that we would not have troops in Lybia or send in troops.
To have such an agreement with a place that is a hot bed of terrorist and anti-American activity and then insert American personnel without even a backup plan in case of an emergency is purely god-awful, lame-brain, incompetent diplomacy.
Plus, what would have happened if a Blackhawk came in loaded with troops and it was hit with an rpg?? Mogadishu 2.0.
I hope we learned from Mogadishu and would not repeat the mistake. Drones, fighter jets, special ops, etc. would do a better job.
Why they tried to cover it up is inexcusable but all politicians lie. If anyone thinks that all politicians are honest, they are fools. 4 people died and that's a shame, but there was probably a risk of more deaths and they felt it was the safest thing to do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
So we should accept the excuses and move on? That grants the politicians license to do whatever they wish and cover it with lies if they feel the public will disagree. That is pretty much what has been happening for the past seventy or eighty years, and has brought about the continuing "fundamental transformation" of responsible citizens into dependent sheep.
If all politicians lie, and, probably, "all" humans lie, what is the point of law and order? What is the point of contracts and agreements of all sort? What is the point of "diplomacy" if it is potentially a pack of lies? Does truth ever enter the equation? Are truth, "transparency," honor, justice, government by of and for the people nice sounding phrases used by cynical politicians to hoodwink us into their peculiar vision of freedom?
So is lying the "safest thing to do"? Are we really safer if how we govern, how we relate to the rest of the world, how we as individuals act, depends on how well we lie? And how readily we accept those lies?