Forum Post: Why do you leftists support the administrations recent actions regarding Libya?
Posted 11 years ago on Oct. 10, 2012, 9:32 p.m. EST by Clicheisking
(-210)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The lies of your messiah are coming out. They deliberately refused to allow beefed up security at that consulate. They knew the attack was a direct terrorist action 24hours after it happened. And yet for many days after they blamed it on a film/trailer less than 20 people had actually seen. And most of these recent threads are DNC talking points. Has the DNC taken over this movement?
Why do you say leftists are DNC friendly?
Most leftists I know consider the DNC as a corrupt right leaning organization lead by corporatists.
Wes Clark - America's Foreign Policy "Coup"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY2DKzastu8
And the coup continues .....................................
One R Vet speaks truth to madness: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-pressler/larry-pressler-obama_b_1948415.html
Someday,the Democrats & Republicans will have to go to Hell because of their cowardice and treachery.They will stay there,together-FOREVER
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/08/an-incriminating-timeline-the-obama-administration-and-libya/
Yes, YES-I know I know...the horrific Heritage Foundation. But hold your bias long enough to watch the VIDEOTAPED evidence and read the FACTUAL timeline posted in the article before you respond.
If you can disprove any of the dates/sources/FACTS posted in the article or shown in the video tape (with actual FACTS that refute them-not just someone else's opinion or statement or comment) I'd love to see them.
If you can't refute/disprove what is laid out here, and you're STILL not concerned about these events on a serious level, then you're part of the problem in this country and you have no business calling yourself a voice for the 99% of anything.
I don't like labels - generally labels degrade the truth
I'm not sure exactly what happened in Libya
I believe - the Rs drastically cut security funding
&
now they are ranting that we did not have enough security & the attacks were organized by a radical Islamist group that used the "video" to stir up a "terrorist" mob attack
I think the Rs should go back and have a 34th anti-obama care vote
or an anti-flag burning amendment
[Removed]
Awww...you don't like other time lines?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html
Funny thing-every freaking intelligent human being on the planet KNEW this was a terrorist attack the DAY it happened, and WHY it happened-except for the President and his Administration (and ZenDog) apparently. It was the video...except that it wasn't. It was a protest-that never existed.
Even Romney called it perfectly the night it happened...and the President decided to go with "it's about a video". Please.
[Removed]
I never mentioned the election, nor did I even insinuate that there are no other considerations beyond the election. Ignore the article, opinion doesn't matter to me, but including the actual statements made by the President and/or his administration would be the REASONABLE, PRUDENT thing to do.
MY POINT-is literally almost the exact same one you are trying to make but you won't hold the mirror up to your own point of view. Let's talk about reason and prudence.
Did the President of the United States, (and/or his administration) demonstrate actions that are "reasonable" or "prudent" when:
*They immediately announced without any hesitation that the attack was the result of a spontaneous protest to a youtube video gone viral that just went too far and ended in violence? (Isn't that "playinbng to the mindset that has already determined and set responsibility even in the absence of fact"? The same damn thing you rail against the WP article for? You can't have it both ways)
*Continued to stand by that story that there HAD BEEN a spontaneous and ongoing protest at the compound all day and into the evening prior to the attack-until the DAY BEFORE the hearings started that would reveal that they had been lying?
*Repeatedly stated that there was no reason to think this was a coordinated, pre-planned terrorist attack even though the MEDIA was already interviewing witnesses and locals who stated that it had been a large scale, fully sophisticated LARGE group of well armed, well coordinated attackers?
Now, the administration's position has consistently been that radical Muslim factions (such as Al Qaeda) are small and dwindling and no longer pose a serious threat-especially since Bin Laden was killed-and that these struggling "democracies" in the Middle East do not need our ARMED help to clean house of these small, disorganized groups.
ANYONE with even a remote understanding of the actual history of the area AND who actually pays attention to EVERYTHING that happens there KNOWS such a stance as the one above is FLAT OUT WRONG. Even the ambassador who DIED, and those who served with him, KNEW they were in danger repeatedly ASKED for more security. They were denied it. WHY?
Now you can blame Republican "budget cuts" all you want to, but it doesn't wash and it also undercuts the argument that the Republicans are war mongers who want to dominate the world militarily. Why would "war mongers" who consistently declare that this region is volatile, dangerous want to CUT military spending/aid to Americans there? That makes no sense. They'd want MORE troops there and MORE defense spending right? (you can't have it both ways)
Americans were ENRAGED in 2011 when they suspected that Obama had arranged for WEAPONS to be sold to/given to/delivered to the "rebels" there so they could overthrow their tyrannical leader. Why? Because anyone semi intelligent person KNOWS that such weapons could end up in the wrong hands AND could then be used against us and against the actual good and innocent people of Libya.
Intelligent Americans BELIEVE that when Muslim extremists say they want to KILL ALL AMERICANS and eradicate all infidels-they actually MEAN it! They BELIEVE that Muslim extremists are GROWING in number and pose a continuing and possibly greater threat today than they ever have. And they BELIEVE that INCREASED security and vigilance in such areas IS THE REASONABLE AND PRUDENT course of action.
Now, if Obama doesn't BELIEVE that, he's an absolute idiot living in complete denial. If security was denied there because the administration didn't think they were necessary-they are IDIOTS. And their naive stupidity resulted in the UNNECESSARY deaths of the Americans THEY sent to Benghazi. If it's JUST because he was too optimistic or hopeful or whatever, then that alone proves that this President and his administration are completely inept and unprepared to deal in foreign policy.
BUT, if the weapons used to kill Stevens and the others are the direct result of HIS actions/decisions about Libya, and he and his administration are willing to LIE as outrageously and often as possible to cover that up-then he's no better than the Bush administration and your blind admiration and loyalty for your party makes you as stupid and naive as you paint Republicans to be.
[Removed]
Your link leads to this thread.
McCain wanted more guns and training for the rebels-the fact that he is an idiot doesn't detract from my point. Just because you spew 24/7 that everyone outside of the Democratic Party moves in lock step agreement with every word spoken by a Republican doesn't make it a reality.
The same people who didn't want Obama putting guns on the ground didn't want McCain putting them there either and for the same damn reason!!!!
[Removed]
I tracked it down myself before I responded above, but the URL might be useful to others.
So my reply still is:
The same people who didn't want Obama putting guns on the ground didn't want McCain putting them there either and for the same damn reason!!!!
[Removed]
Again, the actual "good" people of Libya who needed weapons of defense against Gaddafi forces are not the people I'm talking about. I'm talking about the NUTJOB extremist groups that Obama wants to pretend do not still exist in the middle east getting their hands on weapons and using them to PROVE to the world that they ARE still there and ARE still dangerous and ARE going to do all they can to take down America.
It was an Anniversary Gift. And JUST LIKE the original attack on Sept 11th 2001 was preceded by NUMEROUS smaller attacks on US properties around the world, this attack is likely to be one we look back on and say "Maybe we should have paid more attention to...."
[Removed]
Think she might be a sacrificial "Lamb" ?
[Removed]
Could she be a modern day Ollie N (?) the assets were there by all accounts - just not deployed and arriving several hours late to help out. This is pretty smelly and it seems to be more then a state department fuck-up.
[Removed]
The incident stinks to high heaven - every aspect of it.
[Removed]
How ever it went down - whoever is all involved - it was set up to make us more invested in the area. To stir up the public to support more actions to be taken over there.
[Removed]
Sorry Zen - I have to disagree - this was ( apparently ) a monumental cluster fuck - and it looks to have been no accident or incompetence - the whole thing has a Shakespearean ( staged ) feel to it. ( application of shock doctrine perhaps? )
[Removed]
That is how it goes - and unless a bunch of whistle blowers jump up and say here - here is the evidence - well then - it can remain under the umbrella of plausible deniability.
Free Bradley Manning.
[Removed]
We live in interesting times ( a Chinese Curse ).
im sure it is true.. do you actually think america has the money to fortify every outpost with a battalion? they dole it out the same as anything else.. they have analyst that weigh the risk and determine the need.. just like at airports,, military bases etc etc. im sure ALL outpost believe they need more but they don't rank high enough to count. this is a system - not based on any one persons opinion of what needs to be or not be addressed.
[Removed]
i think americans should understand that if they enter the middle east there is a high likely hood they will die and make their decisions accordingly
I can't believe that there are those people who still think that the "facts have yet to be revealed".
Hey stupid people, it's been over a month and this Adminsitration has yet to get someone in there to investigage. We have live videos when the incident happened and we had news reporters in there days after the incident.
So you are using the excuse "well lets wait for the facts to come out" Well the facts are out - it was a terrorist attack and it was known right after it happened and warnings were given prior to it happening.
This president needs to be "impeached" for derelect of duty - he is moron just like those of you who believe what he says
We have 4 dead Americans and not one person has the balls to come forward and take responsibility - 4 dead Americans people -
Apparently reading some of these posts you don't give a shit for these people because you are too involved in listening to your ass hole leader Obama who continually lies about this.
He doesn't even have the balls to tell the Mother Ms Smith the truth and says to here in a direct conversation "I'll get back to you later".
You who believe what Obama says are just as spinless as he is. 4 Americans dead and you are still debating "wait untill the answers come out" you are all morons.
Well, little MR bad ass, why don't you get off your couch and go whip some Libyan ass. You Hawks got to be the biggest wimps of us all. You sit there and bang the war drums but will never make the sacrifice that comes with war.
I won't fight for my nation because my nation don't fight for me. The true moron is anyone who still rallies around the flag and believes their government should go around the world busting heads. People die on the job all the time. Why should it be such a tragedy now? If you don't want to be killed by Middle Easterners, Don't go to the Middle East. You must be a big moron if you didn't think of that.
I guess we should go bomb Iraq some more?
I dont.
You don't what?
[Removed]