Libya

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by justplugit

So with Biden saying the Administration wasn't told they needed more
security at the Embassy in Bengazi, Obama should have attended more
than 50% of his daily security briefings and read less of them, especially leading up to the 9/11 anniversary.

Where does the buck stop?

Spence, to answer your making things up complaint:
Did not "Giggles" say at the VP debate the Administration was not told of the need for more security?
Was it not confirmed by the White House that Obama only
attended 50% of his daily security briefings and read the others?

As President of the United States and Commander in Chief his FIRST duty is
to protect American citizens. He should have attended all the briefings to
listen, have input, and question. Security briefing meetings are meant for just that, not speed reading after the fact. How are you doing your most important job if you only show up to 1/2 of your meetings?
Your not.

Spence, you show up at 50% of your company meetings and then fail at your
job. Tell me, where would the buck stop?

May be a few things here you may not want to hear, but they were not made
up, or parroted, just my take on the whole situation.

What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscriptions saying about the matter.

[blackxpress]

Pardon my ignorance but isn't the State Dept. part of the administration? If the State Dept. is this inept and if it's true that they aren't keeping the Pres. and VP in the loop on this kind of stuff whose fault is that exactly? And just exactly who is it that sets State Dept. policy with regard to embassy security anyway? Are we really supposed to believe the President has no say in these matters? Maybe he's too busy with his re-election to be bothered with such trivia.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Spence, to answer your making things up complaint:
Did not "Giggles" say at the VP debate the Administration was not told of the need for more security?

The request was very specific, for an extension of a 16 person team based in Tripoli. My understanding is that the decision here is made at the deputy level, Clinton might not even have been aware of it.

I would assume that this would only go to the White House if it conflicted with already set policy or was deemed of grave importance. The request was denied as the policy was to continue to shift security to the Libyan government and limit US exposure.

People seem to be acting like Libya was going to blow up and Obama should have deployed a brigade of Marines.

That's really not the case. We're talking about a request for 16 people who wouldn't have been in a position to help defend the embassy staff even if they were approved.

Was it not confirmed by the White House that Obama only
attended 50% of his daily security briefings and read the others?

We've discussed this one to death. Obama has a different process than Bush did. That he's not always personally briefed doesn't mean he's now aware.

As President of the United States and Commander in Chief his FIRST duty is to protect American citizens. He should have attended all the briefings to listen, have input, and question. Security briefing meetings are meant for just that, not speed reading after the fact. How are you doing your most important job if you only show up to 1/2 of your meetings? Your not.

If the security issue never got beyond the deputies at State, how would having attended a briefing been any different than reading a brief?

The issue still wouldn't have been brought up and the same 4 Americans would have been killed.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Spence, you show up at 50% of your company meetings and then fail at your
job. Tell me, where would the buck stop?

What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscriptions saying about the matter.

Spence I love when you explain your points with the words,
"assume", "seem",and "my understanding", like those are facts.
However, you never seem to answer all the questions, like the ones above.

As Comander in Chief it's his job to be informed. Ignorance is no defense.

So another question, what is your "understanding", "assumption" or "seem to you" where the Buck should Stop.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Spence I love when you explain your points with the words,
"assume", "seem",and "my understanding", like those are facts.
However, you never seem to answer all the questions, like the ones above.

What didn't I answer?

As Comander in Chief it's his job to be informed. Ignorance is no defense.

POTUS doesn't know everything...you rely on the apparatus to inform based on priorities you've set.

We still have tens of thousands of troops deployed and here we're talking about 16 security agents.

So another question, what is your "understanding", "assumption" or "seem to you" where the Buck should Stop.

Ultimately the president gets to take credit or blame for just about anything regardless of their influence.

But the primary reason this is a big story has more to do with the election and far less to do with bigger policy.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

What didn't I answer?




-spence

"What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscritions saying about the matter" ?

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

"What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscritions saying about the matter" ?

Don't usually read them but here's the first thing that came up from their biggest newspaper...

U.S. officials turned down requests for more security at Libya consulate - thestar.com

Seems pretty objective to me.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Don't usually read them but here's the first thing that came up from their biggest newspaper...

U.S. officials turned down requests for more security at Libya consulate - thestar.com

Seems pretty objective to me.

-spence

I agree Spence, it "seems" objective.