|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-16-2016, 10:29 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91651&page=1
U.S. intelligence officials warned President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network might hijack American planes, but White House officials stressed the threat was not specific.
A White House official acknowledged to ABCNEWS that the information prompted administration officials to issue a private warning to transportation department and national security agencies weeks before the attacks
|
I can't disagree with much of what you said, except this...you are placing zero weight, NONE, on the fact that other nations evacuated Benghazi, and that Stevens asked for more security. Clearly the state department knew that other nations fled Benghazi, they knew why, and they knew that Stevens asked for more security.
And knowing all that, not only did we leave Stevens there, but we had no help to send him within a 13 hour flight radius. Hilary was in charge of that organization, and if she sucked that bad, she's not fit to be promoted.
I am deeply critical of Bush, in that it took the feds so long to respond to Katrina. I could have filled my car with water, and driven to New Orleans before the feds got there, and there is zero excuse for that. I also blame New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, because we all knew a week ahead of time that the storm was coming, and he failed to evacuate. THAT, to me, is comparable to how badly Benghazi was bungled. Right before Benghazi, we knew a lot more, than Bush knew on 09/10/01. I don't see how you can compare the two.
I admit it looks hypocritical on my end, because I am more critical of Obama/Clinton than I am of Bush...but the fact is, the Red Cross has no sophisticated intelligence mechanisms, and they knew they needed to evacuate. If the State Dept is less informed than the Red Cross (which they were in this case, that's not debateable), then whoever is in charge of the State Dept, is failing miserably.
|
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 10:42 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,299
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
you are placing zero weight, NONE, on the fact that other nations evacuated Benghazi, and that Stevens asked for more security. Clearly the state department knew that other nations fled Benghazi, they knew why, and they knew that Stevens asked for more security.
|
I'm not ignoring that at all. I just think as the most powerful nation on earth, our actions, interests, etc. are different from other entities.
|
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 11:18 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
I'm not ignoring that at all. I just think as the most powerful nation on earth, our actions, interests, etc. are different from other entities.
|
As usual, that's a valid point. But if our unique interests mandate that we leave people in a region so dangerous that everyone else is fleeing...is it not a sign of dismal management, that (1) his requests for extra security were denied, and (2) we had no help to send within a 13 hour flight radius?
You raised good, tough, challenging points Paul.
|
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 12:51 PM
|
#4
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
As usual, that's a valid point. But if our unique interests mandate that we leave people in a region so dangerous that everyone else is fleeing...is it not a sign of dismal management, that (1) his requests for extra security were denied, and (2) we had no help to send within a 13 hour flight radius?
You raised good, tough, challenging points Paul.
|
Knowing that #1 and #2, Stevens also chose to still go to Benghazi, so while he asked for more security, he deemed it acceptable risk to go there. That isn't pissing on his grave, but hindsight is 20/20 for sure
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 01:09 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Knowing that #1 and #2, Stevens also chose to still go to Benghazi, so while he asked for more security, he deemed it acceptable risk to go there. That isn't pissing on his grave, but hindsight is 20/20 for sure
|
Bryan, whose job is it to protect our ambassadors, when they agree to put themselves in risky situations? A 13 hour flight radius includes a significant portion of our planet, and there was NOTHING to help him within that radius?
Other than party loyalty, I don't see how anyone can defend that. If you can't criticize Obama/Clinton for leaving him out to dry like that, I guess you'd never criticize them for anything, ever. It's like me defending how long it took Bush to send water to the Superdome after Katrina. I couldn't ever do that with a straight face.
|
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 01:36 PM
|
#6
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Bryan, whose job is it to protect our ambassadors, when they agree to put themselves in risky situations? A 13 hour flight radius includes a significant portion of our planet, and there was NOTHING to help him within that radius?
Other than party loyalty, I don't see how anyone can defend that. If you can't criticize Obama/Clinton for leaving him out to dry like that, I guess you'd never criticize them for anything, ever. It's like me defending how long it took Bush to send water to the Superdome after Katrina. I couldn't ever do that with a straight face.
|
I think not having a plan 'B' in place was a mistake. period. A mistake is different than doing something maliciously wrong. I would hope that that has been a painful lesson for this and other administrations. Has it been worth X different Benghazi hearings? probably not.
So let's plat devils advocate. Could Stevens have requested they leave? Did he and was ordered they stay? He likely know the conditions on ground better than anyone in DC State, right?
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
02-16-2016, 01:59 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
I think not having a plan 'B' in place was a mistake. period. A mistake is different than doing something maliciously wrong. I would hope that that has been a painful lesson for this and other administrations. Has it been worth X different Benghazi hearings? probably not.
So let's plat devils advocate. Could Stevens have requested they leave? Did he and was ordered they stay? He likely know the conditions on ground better than anyone in DC State, right?
|
I don't think Obama/Clinton did anything out of maliciousness, either. Just incompetence.
"Has it been worth X different Benghazi hearings? probably not."
The families might give you a different answer.
"Could Stevens have requested they leave? Did he and was ordered they stay? He likely know the conditions on ground better than anyone in DC State, right?"
if you want to say he contributed to his own death, maybe that's valid. But if he didn't go to benghazi, we had other personnel there.
I follow these things pretty closely (as do you). I have never, in any forum, seen anyone, anywhere, suggest that Stevens is more at fault than his bosses. But maybe it's valid.
Stevens didn't have the authority to increase security, which is why he asked for it. Nor did he have the authority to put military assets within 7,000 miles of where he was.
Those who had such authority, are also largely responsible. To the extent that Stevens was responsible, he paid for that with his life. As of very recently, no one at state who was responsible for the intelligence failure, nor for the refusal to increase his seccurity, nor for the fact that we had no help to offer within a 13 hour flight radius.
They got caught with their pants down, Bryan (the Red Cross knew to get out, and we didn't), and 4 superb Americans paid for that with their lives. Not every American death implies incompetence somewhere. In my opinion, a very compelling case can be made that in this case, there was mind-bogling incompetence. Which, also in my opinion, is what you get when we elect an inexperienced neophyte who spent his life in an Ivy League faculty room, and who therefore has zero understanding of how the world actually works.
Other nations saw the danger. We left him there, denied his requests for extra security, and with zero support within a 13 hour flight radius.
"He likely know the conditions on ground better than anyone in DC State, right"
That's likely true, which is likely why he asked for more security. Which was denied by someone who clearly thought they had a better understanding of the situation, than he did. If, as you say, he ha dth ebest view of the situation, then he shouldn't have to ask someone else for extra security, that should be his call.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:42 AM.
|
| |