Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2013/02/09 21:45:51
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
Also, I have a hard time taking Republicans (Especially McCain) seriously on this after they were "too busy" to go to the special briefing on the matter.
You're a country of 300 million people. And it's a dangerous world out there. Every so often in the course of running a country of 300 million stuff will go wrong and some people will die.
Now that might sound like a blasé approach to the death of some people, but can anyone tell me how many American security staff died in Iraq? Because I'd think if the deaths of some Americans employed by their government demanded an investigation and talk of an impeachment... then people would at least know, maybe even to the nearest dozen, how many Americans died protecting facilities in Iraq.
But no-one knows, because that kind of thinking at its core is ridiculous. It's a country of 300 million, and it's a dangerous world out there. Bad gak will happen sometimes.
But when bad gak happens while the other tribe is in the big, well let's launch investigations and haul everyone in and ask them nonsense questions.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/02/12 02:57:55
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2013/02/11 05:46:49
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
The thing that makes Benghazi more significant than some of the other attacks is the fact that the ambassador was killed, and we haven't had an ambassador killed in an embassy or consulate attack since 1979 in Afghanistan.
Hordini wrote: The thing that makes Benghazi more significant than some of the other attacks is the fact that the ambassador was killed, and we haven't had an ambassador killed in an embassy or consulate attack since 1979 in Afghanistan.
Add in the length of time the attack took. It wasn't a simple drive by or bombing, it was an assault that took several hours and had weapons like mortars firing in support of the infantry conducting the assault.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2013/02/11 13:43:19
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
d-usa wrote: So the 20 killed during Bush didn't warrant any hearings because their job descriptions were not important enough?
From 2006 on the Dems controlled the House and the Senate. Perhaps they were happy with how Bush and his team handled the incidents.
Write Pelosi and Reid and ask them why it wasn't an issue for them. Maybe the 9-11 hearings earlier took the steam out of them.
By the way, even in the worst of those attacks (Yemen), the host nation security forces did what they were supposed to do, that didn't happen in this one.
And out of curiosity (honest question, not trying to be a smart ass but don't have time to do the research this morning), where are you getting that 20 killed number? I found the following:
Like in 2002 when the US Consulate in the Karachi, Pakistan, was attacked and 10 were killed?
Or in 2004 when the US embassy in Uzbekistan was attacked and two were killed and another nine injured?
How about in 2004, when the US Consulate in Saudi Arabia was stormed and 8 lost their lives?
There is more: In 2006, armed men attacked the US Embassy in Syria and one was murdered.
Then in 2007 a grenade was thrown at the US Embassy in Athens.
In 2008, the US Embassy in Serbia was set on fire.
In 2008, bombings in the US Embassy in Yemen killed 10.
But most of those were not US citizens (for example, in the Pakistan attack no US cits were killed).
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2013/02/11 14:24:49
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
Maybe democrats realized that embassies in dangerous countries are dangerous, and didn't play political football with the lives lost?
Of course this foaming at the mouth scapegoat hunt is one of the reasons the GOP is alienating voters. Besides the not caring avoid attacks that happened when Bush was in charge, or not showing up to the hearings you demanded.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/02/11 14:26:17
2013/02/11 14:27:02
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
You mean the consistent record with which the democrats attacked the attacks on embassies during Bush and Obama?
Of were the democrats in charge able to prevent McCain from asking questions in 2006, and did Democrats prevent McCain from walking over to the hearing about the current attacks when he was busy screaming at the media about not having any hearings?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/02/11 14:30:14
2013/02/11 15:09:57
Subject: Re:Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
A shocking new book makes dramatic claims about the motives behind the 9/11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. It also claims former CIA director David Petraeus was the victim of an internal coup by some of his deputies and bodyguards, who arranged for his extramarital affair to be investigated by the FBI, a highly unusual course of action.
The book, Benghzai: The Definitive Report, was written by Brandon Webb, a retired Navy SEAL, and Jack Murphy, a retired Green Beret. The two are editors of SOFREP.com, a site devoted to news and stories written by current and former special-operations commandos.
According to a preview of the book in Britain’s Daily Mail newspaper:
The September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.
The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had ‘kicked a hornet’s nest’ among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.
John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing ‘unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,’ according to the e-book. Brennan is Obama’s pick to replace Petraeus as head of the CIA.
If true, much would be explained about why the Benghazi consulate was targeted and why the administration has been so anxious to avoid congressional and media scrutiny of the first assassination of a U.S. ambassador in over 30 years.
The book’s authors also claim that:
Senior CIA officers targeted Petraeus [for exposure] because they didn’t like the way he was running the agency — focusing more on paramilitary operations than intelligence analysis. They used their political clout and their connections to force an FBI investigation of his affair with Paul Broadwell and make it public . . .
“It was high-level career officers on the CIA who got the ball rolling on the investigation. It was basically a palace coupe to get Petraeus out of there,’ Jack Murphy, one of the authors, told MailOnline. . . .
“It was well known to Petraeus’s Personal Security Detachment (bodyguards) that he and Broadwell were having an affair. He wasn’t the only high-ranking Agency head or general engaged in extramarital relations, but when the 7th floor wanted Petraeus out, they cashed in their chips,” Webb and Murphy write. . . .
“It’s almost like they wanted him not just to resign but that they wanted him kicked out of the political game for at least a number of years,” Murphy told MailOnline. . . .
The authors say that Kelley’s report may have started in the FBI investigation — but CIA officers pressured the Justice Department to keep the inquiry open. . . .
Petraeus was furious, they say, because he was kept in the dark about the raids being conducted without his knowledge by the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) across Libya and North Africa.
Webb and Murphy claim that the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate and a CIA outpost in Benghazi proved to Petraeus that he was an outsider in the Obama administration and that he would remain marginalized as long as he was at the CIA.
A lot of fact-checking will have to be done to substantiate the claims by Webb and Murphy. But from my own reporting, I have learned that no one runs afoul of senior CIA officials — or John Brennan — lightly or without peril. CIA officials angry at the Bush administration’s treatment of the agency in 2006 helped elevate the Valerie Plame affair into a national scandal and crippled much of the White House’s ability to conduct foreign policy. In the end, there was precious little evidence of any real security breach or wrongdoing beyond a perjury conviction of Scooter Libby, a top aide to Vice President Cheney.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/02/11 15:13:40
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
Easy E wrote: I beleive the head of the Joint Chiefs mentioned that some fighter aircraft could have made it to the embassy, and then what?
Really, what is the end play YOU wanted to see out of the Benghazi thing? I really want to know, because I don't get it.
Nuke the site from orbit? Its the only way to be sure.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/02/11 20:21:44
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2013/02/11 20:22:07
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
Hordini wrote: The thing that makes Benghazi more significant than some of the other attacks is the fact that the ambassador was killed, and we haven't had an ambassador killed in an embassy or consulate attack since 1979 in Afghanistan.
Are you telling me that if this was just 4 regular diplomatic personel this inquiry wouldn't be happening?
And if you look at the case in 1979, you see an ambassador who was kidnapped and killed in a bungled rescue by Soviet & Afghani forces. But what you don't see is any effort to blame the Secretary of State of any of their staff for what happened. Because 1979 was a different time in US politics, and partisan politics doesn't mix with the basic value of governance. And governance knows that the world is a dangerous place, and sometimes security systems will fail.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: For feths sake... do you believe whatever Obama says... 'cuz, he's Obama?
No, but the point is you have to look at a book and its authors and apply some critical reasoning. A book written by some guys who claim to fame is that they're former soldiers who run a website... is not a seal of academic excellence.
I just find it hard to believe anyone would look at Bengahzi today and what's been reported so far and say "things are squared, lets move on...".
I refuse to believe that the events warrant anything like the attention the Republicans are trying to give the issue.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/02/12 03:13:19
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2013/02/12 04:16:04
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
whembly wrote: For feths sake... do you believe whatever Obama says... 'cuz, he's Obama?
No, but the point is you have to look at a book and its authors and apply some critical reasoning. A book written by some guys who claim to fame is that they're former soldiers who run a website... is not a seal of academic excellence.
Sure... that's why I emphasized the "A lot of fact-checking will have to be done to substantiate the claims by Webb and Murphy" bit...
The milblogs are staying on top of that... they're not outright dismissing it.
I just find it hard to believe anyone would look at Bengahzi today and what's been reported so far and say "things are squared, lets move on...".
I refuse to believe that the events warrant anything like the attention the Republicans are trying to give the issue.
Sure... there's be some over reaction on both sides (it's the current political environment now).
The whole thing is distateful...
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/02/12 05:16:42
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
whembly wrote: Sure... that's why I emphasized the "A lot of fact-checking will have to be done to substantiate the claims by Webb and Murphy" bit...
Sure, I got that. And while we both agree on that, I think the difference comes in what we think of the claims while they're not verified. I think 'well this is just another political theory that will probably disappear like all the rest', where you seem to be thinking 'well this could just check out'.
Sure... there's be some over reaction on both sides (it's the current political environment now).
The whole thing is distateful...
This invented contraversy is really all on the Republicans. Honestly, it's probably worse than Whitewater (less contrived, but more distasteful).
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2013/02/12 05:42:51
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
2013/02/12 13:48:22
Subject: Graham demolished the entire WH's defense on Benghazi
