drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 If there really was an AC130 in the air anywhere near Libya (which there probably was on regular deployment rotation anyways in the region) this entire debacle could have been resolved within minutes saving American lives. It's clear Obama cared more about what this could mean to his campaign than about preserving American life and sovereignty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 This event has made me furious. No way should this have happened the way it did, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 This event has made me furious. No way should this have happened the way it did, Never. Ever. The worst part is its lied about, covered up and then douche in chief jets off to Vegas, leno and jay-z. Priorities??? Wtf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 He turned his back on those he has sworn to protect. This is treason to every American. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Reminds me of Michelle's "all this over a flag?" Attitude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Never. Ever. The worst part is its lied about, covered up and then douche in chief jets off to Vegas, leno and jay-z. Priorities??? Wtf But he is all over "Sandy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) If there really was an AC130 in the air anywhere near Libya (which there probably was on regular deployment rotation anyways in the region) this entire debacle could have been resolved within minutes saving American lives. It's clear Obama cared more about what this could mean to his campaign than about preserving American life and sovereignty. Just to point out how out of touch Obama is, think about this: if we quickly went in and saved those four Americans and took out some terrorists in the process, and then brought Chris Stevens, etc., home to explain to the American people that we kick bad guy asses when they threaten our people, does anyone OTHER than Barack Obama and David Axelrod genuinely believe that would HURT the Obama campaign? You can't go wrong saving Americans from terror attacks. You just can't. Unless you're Barack Obama and you somehow think your Sally Fields Foreign Policy plan really has people liking the US all of a sudden. Edited October 31, 2012 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Just to point out how out of touch Obama is, think about this: if we quickly went in and saved those four Americans and took out some terrorists in the process, and then brought Chris Stevens, etc., home to explain to the American people that we kick bad guy asses when they threaten our people, does anyone OTHER than Barack Obama and David Axelrod genuinely believe that would HURT the Obama campaign? You can't go wrong saving Americans from terror attacks. You just can't. Unless you're Barack Obama and you somehow think your Sally Fields Foreign Policy plan really has people liking the US all of a sudden. I disagree. It ("bin Laden [al Qaeda] is dead") was half their campaign platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Just to point out how out of touch Obama is, think about this: if we quickly went in and saved those four Americans and took out some terrorists in the process, and then brought Chris Stevens, etc., home to explain to the American people that we kick bad guy asses when they threaten our people, does anyone OTHER than Barack Obama and David Axelrod genuinely believe that would HURT the Obama campaign? You can't go wrong saving Americans from terror attacks. You just can't. Unless you're Barack Obama and you somehow think your Sally Fields Foreign Policy plan really has people liking the US all of a sudden. You are completely out of your mind. Completely gone. Way worse than any Bush conspirator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Just to point out how out of touch Obama is, think about this: if we quickly went in and saved those four Americans and took out some terrorists in the process, and then brought Chris Stevens, etc., home to explain to the American people that we kick bad guy asses when they threaten our people, does anyone OTHER than Barack Obama and David Axelrod genuinely believe that would HURT the Obama campaign? You can't go wrong saving Americans from terror attacks. You just can't. Unless you're Barack Obama and you somehow think your Sally Fields Foreign Policy plan really has people liking the US all of a sudden. Affirmative action POTUS He is in over his head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) You guys who have various issues with Benghazi, so be it, I don't know everything and it's fair to question things. You all who think Obama willfully sacrificed people to cover up the attack from happening for political reasons are out of your minds. Edited October 31, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) You are completely out of your mind. Completely gone. Way worse than any Bush conspirator. You will agree, though, that Obama sat on his hands while brave Americans needlessly lost their lives, right? Sorry, quoted before you edited, Edited October 31, 2012 by wnyguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 You guys who have various issues with Benghazi, so be it, I don't know everything and it's fair to question things. You all who think Obama willfully sacrificed people to cover up the attack from happening for political reasons are out of your minds. If it quacks like a duck... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) You will agree, though, that Obama sat on his hands while brave Americans needlessly lost their lives, right? Sorry, quoted before you edited, What specifically am I thinking about for that question? No hellfire reigned down by a drone or jet? Edited October 31, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 What specifically am I thinking about for that question? No hellfire reigned down by a drone or jet? Not a finger lifted to help. They sat on their hands and let them die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 What specifically am I thinking about for that question? No hellfire reigned down by a drone or jet? How about any means necessary (of which there were plenty) to protect Americans under attack? And I realize I said Obama sat on his hands, which is not true, he left TO FLY TO VEGAS! If that does not raise just a spark of outrage, of disbelief, of doubt in the efficiency of the Commander In Chief well, then, I don't know what to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) No. http://dailycaller.c...enghazi-rescue/ Gingrich said that the bombshell emails could be revealed within the next two days. “There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down,” Gingrich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobilize marines and C-130s and the fighter aircraft, and they were told explicitly by the White House stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reliable U.S. senator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enormous questions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser’s role, the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoulders, that he said don’t go. And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the president said he had instructions they are supposed to do everything they could to secure American personnel.” After noting that the rumor, if true, would have a substantial impact on the presidential election, Gingrich pointed to another possible “October surprise” in the coming days. “The other big story, I think, that is going to break is on corruption and extraordinary waste in the solar power grants and direct involvement by the Obama White House, including the president, in the solar panel grants involving billions of dollars, and I suspect that’s going to break Wednesday and Thursday of this week,” Gingrich added. To me? Gingrich is saying he "has it", and is going to use it. Even if he doesn't have it, it's out there, and it's just a matter of time, or, more accurately, timing, until they had it over to FOX. Like or hate it, irrelevant. As I said before, I would bet the farm that the R Congress people, the CIA, or some combination of them have ALL of this stuff, including the audio tapes of the guys asking for air support, and the video feeds, AND, the above. They have been dropping a new piece of it every day. They paused for the hurricane. Tomorrow it will start again. Rumor? Rumor my ass. Gingrich is...Gingrich = not to be taken lightly when it comes to politics. Gingrich is positioning. He is setting up the big fall. All that remains is who won't have a chair when the music stops. Gingrich is warning the MSM: they better start looking for a place to sit down. The "solar power" crap is just fluff...designed to cover the main move here. Why does anybody care whether 2 networks have this info? Why put that out there? No reason, other than when they unleash the rest of this story...the networks won't be able to deny it, or say they have to investigate further, since they already "had it". They won't be able to play defense for Obama. They will just have to sit there, and take it. This is hardball politics at its best. Like it or hate it, it's expert skill. Hey I could be wrong...but the "2 networks already have it" says: not likely. Edited October 31, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 What specifically am I thinking about for that question? No hellfire reigned down by a drone or jet? You obviously haven't read through this entire thread and its accompanying links to articles. It makes it difficult for someone to explain to you everything that has gone on. Sorta like the reason Tarvaris Jackson hasn't been activated. He missed traing camp & preseason. Anyway, the POTUS claimed that he told the DOD to do everything possible to secure our personnel. Leon Pannetta claimed that he made a decision to not go to their aid because of the "fog of war". A State Department higher up claimed in a Congressional hearing that they had real time video of the attack at the consulate. Although this was in the evening in Libya it was late afternoon in DC. They had a series of 2 drones in the air to monitor what was going on. The emails and sat phone that the group in the Situation Room received clearly stated that they were being attacked by terrorists and begged for help. Tyrone Woods (former Navy Seal and most likely CIA) and another were at the CIA Annex about a mile away from the consulate. They were twice told not to go to the aid of the consulate before they decided to do it on their own anyway. The were able to evacuate somewhere between 20-30 people and get them back to the annex. They could not find Ambassador Stephens. Once back at the annex they were attacked again. During this time they were begging for help. Tyrone Woods was on the roof manning a machine gun and had laser targeted the mortar position that they were being attacked from. If the military had just sent an AC130 which is a prop-jet capable of flying at low speeds and designed for situation just like this, the attack might have been repelled. They had them within 1-11/2 hours away. This doesn't even touch on why Ambassador Stephens was there in the first place. Reports are that he was buying up arms that were captured from the former Libyan govt. and passing them on to the Syrian rebels through Turkey. All of the above information was known by the administration within a day or two at the most. The fact that it wasn't some spontaneous protest turned ugly was known immediately. The administration claimed that it was a protest for two weeks afterwards, and has conveniently stonewalled on the subject, claiming they are "investigating". Hope this is a good summary, but if you really care, follow the links in this entire thread and see where else they may take you. In my mind this is worse than Iran-Contra and Watergate. Someone in the administration or the DOD left our men on the field. If it was POTUS, then impeachment or resignation is in order. If it was someone not following his supposed orders then heads should roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 You are completely out of your mind. Completely gone. Way worse than any Bush conspirator. What are you not getting???? What makes him gone??? What is your version of events in Libya, and why shouldn't the American public be furious and DEMAND answers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) I read links in here 3rd. What I'm saying is what specifically has you so riled up that is the worst cover-up/scandal in history? It basically comes down to commanders telling the guy to stand down? I mean I agree it's not something people like to hear, lots of stories of that happening in the military including that really high profile Ganjgal battle with that guy that wrote that book... It comes down to the communication about exactly what happened and why th days following? I'm not here to defend anything against any theory (of which there are many)...I'm just wondering what is it that is so scandalous that this is the worst act of cover-up/whatever in history that people in here are calling for impeachment lol...or is it really just something bad happened before the election you and want Obama gone so it's got to be turned from bad to the worst scandal in history? EDIT: And also the other thing I don't get is the implication from some places give that somehow all would have been saved by Mitt? I mean I don't get what it is that Mitt would do, or Obama should have done, in the midst of this cluster that makes this whole thing good...crazies attacked the consulate and now there's post-hoc critics out there just as every loon did w/ Bush talking about conspiracy and should have done this and that...it's just sort of transparent. Edited October 31, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts