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.
Congress would have to do that. And since, all but a few, were not interested in the
fact that Obama waged an illegal war in Libya, I do not see that happening.
"The legal machinations Mr. Obama has used to justify war without Congressional consent set a troubling precedent that could allow future administrations to wage war at their convenience — free of legislative checks and balances."
If I was one of those DEMS who screamed about Bush's legality w/ Iraq, I certainly would
not be defending Obama on this one. Would you?
Not to rain on your hate-parade, but I'd like to point out a simple obvious reality that anti-Obama posters consistently miss regarding the Libya thing.
We intervened in response to a request from NATO allies. The NATO treaty was approved by congress and we are legally bound to it. Perhaps this explains why even the most ardent congressional Obamaphobes aren't doing anything but making dumb statements to "energize the base."
Put up or shut up.
Start impeachment proceedings now, while there is still plenty of time to make asses of yourselves, then wait until November and see what happens.
It seems the Republicans are eager to cut their own throats. Why dilly-dally? Get on with it.
God, I hope they do. It will give the House Republicans something to do, since they've shown they have no interest in actually governing or doing anything constructive, and it will give the country a great showcase for what the GOP is really all about, right before the mid-terms. Clinton left office with the highest end-of-office approval rating of any U.S. president since World War II following the GOP Follies of 1998.
Bring it on, GOP. Stop pussyfooting around and begin impeachment proceedings. You all seem so sure you have the goods, what are you waiting for?
Seriously now. How do we know. This new "email" just came about. What other info
is floating out there.???
"U.S. military personnel knew early on that the Benghazi attack was a "hostile action" and not a protest gone awry, according to a retired general who SERVED at U.S. Africa Command's headquarters in Germany DURING THE ATTACK.
Anyone that has served, or has anyone serving in our military finds these actions extremely disturbing.
Goes without saying, our people stuck in Benghazi that night deserved more.
I know, it was a tragic event....More like moral indignation.
From the linked article:
Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the committee, cited the testimony of then-commander of AFRICOM Gen. Carter Ham and others who testified that the military moved a special forces unit from Europe to Sicily while the attack was ongoing, and sent a special anti-terrorism team of Marines to Tripoli within a day of the attack. "Why are you testifying that the U.S. military did not try to save lives?" Cummings asked. Lovell said he was not disputing that information. "I did not say we did not try," Lovell said. "What I'm speaking to is that we as a nation need to try to do more, in preparations, so that in the future ... we can support the people and have their backs."
From the chair of the House's Armed Services Committee:
The statement from Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., marks a rare intra-party squabble on Benghazi. While Republicans on the House oversight committee touted the testimony of retired Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell -- who said U.S. personnel "should have tried" to help Americans under fire that night, and the State Department never gave the green light -- McKeon suggested that those in the chain of command saw things differently. "BG Lovell did not serve in a capacity that gave him reliable insight into operational options available to commanders during the attack, nor did he offer specific courses of action not taken," McKeon said in a statement. He added: "We have no evidence that Department of State officials delayed the decision to deploy what few resources DoD had available to respond."
It would appear that Issa's antics have now upset a fellow Republican committee chair.
Who knew that Obama and Hillary had such fine control of the Muslims masses all over the world?
Masses all over the world did not burn down the consulate in Libya.
What this administration should have known was that Libya was the ultimate "hot spot"
since we invaded the country. We can have upgraded security at a ball
game, but not at a consultate after repeated previous attacks in a war
zone.
"On August 2, six weeks before he died, Stevens requested "protective detail bodyguard potions," saying the added guards "will fill the vacuum of security personnel currently at post who will be leaving with the next month and will not be replaced." He called "the security condition in Libya ... unpredictable, volatile and violent." It's not known what happened to that request." -
Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the committee, cited the testimony of then-commander of AFRICOM Gen. Carter Ham and others who testified that the military moved a special forces unit from Europe to Sicily while the attack was ongoing, and sent a special anti-terrorism team of Marines to Tripoli within a day of the attack.
" Lovell said. "What I'm speaking to is that we as a nation need to try to do more, in preparations, so that in the future ... we can support the people and have their backs."
The statement from Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., marks a rare intra-party squabble on Benghazi. While Republicans on the House oversight committee touted the testimony of retired Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell -- who said U.S. personnel "should have tried" to help Americans under fire that night, and the State Department never gave the green light -- McKeon suggested that those in the chain of command saw things differently.
I thought his questioning of the general was cut and dry.
You are trying to defend something that is not worth defending.
America, in particular the State Dept. & our commander in chief ****ed up.
Live with it, because others didn't.
Right. Because as we know, the Muslim world otherwise reacts so rationally to perceived insults. They've never done anything like that entirely on their own (cough, cough, cartoons).
Who knew that Obama and Hillary had such fine control of the Muslims masses all over the world?
I was going to make that point as well. We are talking about millions of Muslim people who go insane over a silly cartoon. The Obama admin knew that screaming about "the movie, the movie the movie" and focus the attention of Muslims to it, would be sure create sufficient world-wide Muslim outrage.
Like I said, if it really was about the movie, they'd have steered people away from it, and do their best to prevent any further spread of violence. But it really was about a 9/11 terrorist attack on Obama's watch, so the movie was the distraction to steer people away from Obama's failures which led to the terror attack.
The article you quote was Sept 16th, five days after the president and his admin screamed from the roof tops about 'the movie, the movie, the movie.' The Benghazi attack was not about the movie, so Hilary, Obama and gang made damn sure the entire Muslim world knew about this obscure YouTube video.
If the deadly terrorist attack on Benghazi really was about the movie, then the prudent thing to have been done, would be to play down the movie and distract people away from it. The wise thing to do would have been to demonize the people involved, to make it about the evil, murderous, terrorists, so as to dissuade anyone else who might want to imitate the attackers from 9/11.
But instead, our government justified Muslim outrage over the movie, they all but gave the entire world a video link to the movie, so as many people as possible could be justifiably outraged.
The Obama admin knew all of this, which is why the acted as they did. The Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack, it was bad for Obama, so Obama had to play down the terrorist attack and distract people away from it, and make it all about a YouTube video and demonize the producer of the movie.
Word of the video was spreading for 3 days prior to the attack in Benghazi. Obama and Clinton were not the reason why word of the video was spreading. The demonstrations in Cairo that the CIA warned the Embassy in Cairo about occurred prior to the attack in Benghazi.
BBC News - Q&A: Anti-Islam film How did the film come to public attention?The 14-minute video was first posted on YouTube on 1 July without attracting much attention. It was later picked up by various Arab TV stations, with religious Egyptian TV channel al-Nas' presenter Sheikh Khalad Abdalla broadcasting scenes on 8 September. A clip from his show, dubbed into Arabic, was posted online and within days had been viewed by hundreds of thousands of people. This thread is about an email by Ben Rhodes concurrent with the article. The article dated the 16th is talking about attacks that occurred on the Friday and Saturday prior to the Sunday Susan Rice appeared on the Sunday talk shows. Clearly there was more going on then just Benghazi. Other embassies and US diplomatic facilitates were being attacked. US armed forces protecting the diplomatic facilities were being attacked and injured. It is in that context that Ben Rhodes' email should be viewed.
Here is a link to a similar article dated the 14th.
"You heard about this early on, ....you dismissed the idea that this attack was in fact a
demonstration that went awry, and it was based on a youtube video out of Los Angeles...
Yes Sir. Short Answer."
Was he a CIA analyst? Did he provide an assessment of the attack to the Obama Administration and Congress?
The Obama Administration relied on the CIA assessment.
We intervened in response to a request from NATO allies. The NATO treaty was approved by congress and we are legally bound to it. Perhaps this explains why even the most ardent congressional Obamaphobes aren't doing anything but making dumb statements to "energize the base."
We are primarily NATO.
I do not think we need to rehash why we should not have gone into Libya, not on this thread.
But it clearly shows a pattern of lying with this administration.
Not that other administrations have not lied, but let us just see it for what it is.
"Several U.N. diplomats who attended a closed-door Security Council meeting on Libya told Reuters that U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice raised the Viagra issue in the context of increasing reports of sexual violence by Gaddafi's troops."
On Thursday, US ambassador Susan Rice announced that Libyan government troops were being issued Viagra and told to rape as a terror weapon. She made the comment as part of a debate with another envoy to highlight that “the coalition is confronting an adversary doing reprehensible things.” Several diplomats said Rice provided no evidence for the Viagra allegation, which they said was made in an attempt to persuade doubters the conflict in Libya was not just a standard civil war but a much nastier fight in which Gadhafi is not afraid to order his troops to commit heinous acts.
However, today, MSNBC was told by US military and intelligence officials that there is no basis for Rice’s claims. While rape has been reported as a “weapon” in many conflicts, the US officials say they’ve seen no such reports out of Libya."
Really - "obamaphobes" - does that really belong in this discussion?
Is everyone an obamaphobe that thinks this administration needs to
be accountable?
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.
