Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.
But yet, when he had considerably more evidence then that in Benghazi, he sat on his hands for seven hours and did nothing, even though we had US fighter jets an hour away.
But Obama did enter Parkistan without authorization from the Pakistan government to kill Osama bin Laden.
Something got screwed up...but the same can be said for 9/11 and I wouldn't leave the blame for that on GW Bush either. (Even though there was plenty of actionable intel there too)
But Obama did enter Parkistan without authorization from the Pakistan government to kill Osama bin Laden.
Something got screwed up...but the same can be said for 9/11 and I wouldn't leave the blame for that on GW Bush either. (Even though there was plenty of actionable intel there too)
Yes he did. I'm just heading off the next excuse by this administration, when they say they tried to bring in US support, but claim Libya would not allow them to fly into their airspace or some such.
Yes he did. I'm just heading off the next excuse by this administration, when they say they tried to bring in US support, but claim Libya would not allow them to fly into their airspace or some such.
GWB didn't attempt to sugar coat the truth or cover anything up. The cover up is the problem here.
But yet, when he had considerably more evidence then that in Benghazi, he sat on his hands for seven hours and did nothing, even though we had US fighter jets an hour away.
Really? As opposed to the weeks or days or months that it takes to mount a strike what pray tell General were these jets supposed to do considering that no one knew where in the compound the Stevens or anyone else for that matter actually were located amongst the buildings?
Sorry dudes and dudesses, try as you might you can't spin this into Watergate or any of a number of Bush fiascos.
Really? As opposed to the weeks or days or months that it takes to mount a strike what pray tell General were these jets supposed to do considering that no one knew where in the compound the Stevens or anyone else for that matter actually were located amongst the buildings?
Sorry dudes and dudesses, try as you might you can't spin this into Watergate or any of a number of Bush fiascos.
It's shocking how little the people here know about international relations and military operations.
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.
But yet, when he had considerably more evidence then that in Benghazi, he sat on his hands for seven hours and did nothing, even though we had US fighter jets an hour away.
Really? As opposed to the weeks or days or months that it takes to mount a strike what pray tell General were these jets supposed to do considering that no one knew where in the compound the Stevens or anyone else for that matter actually were located amongst the buildings?
Sorry dudes and dudesses, try as you might you can't spin this into Watergate or any of a number of Bush fiascos.
We did NOTHING, not even a low-level mach run. All we did was listen to their pleas over their cell phones, and let them all die, one at a time. and when they all died, we sat back and repeated this same wait to die, tactic with the men from the annex.
We told Stevens that he had a safe room, a lot of good it does when he goes there and no one ever came to help. Did we even have anyone in Tripoli we could send?
How badly did we abandon those brave men? Did we never have any plan in place in case something like this happened?
What the hell is this thread about? What high level terrorist leader did we have dead to rights but then do nothing about?
It might not be obvious to you, because it takes some thought to see where I'm going with this.
We had seven hours.
We had actionable intel, the Benghazi attack.
We had high value targets, our ambassador and diplomats and personnel.
Seven hours, and no help came from the Libyan government.
Libya's government did not act to save our people, and neither did we.
We have been hearing new questions being asked - why didn't we do anything, when we had rapid response NATO forces less then 500 miles away?
How safe do the people in NATO feel, when we can't even respond to a small armed attack, much less a large, heavily armed aggressive assault force?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
