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.
Seems to be a bit of a confused timeline here. The anti-Gaddafi rebels in 2011 were actually the people in control in 2012. Hardly "rebels" any more. But "former Gaddafi officials"? Sure, no quibble with that.
I was typing quickly, and couldn't remember exact details. That's why I found the quote for you when I got home from work.
They had 11 hours to grill her and ask every imaginable question by their team of lawyers, I can't imagine many people standing up to that and still succeeding. Where would you have if not for the email problem, nothing.
Succeeding to prove it was all Political for those people to even be there. After all the boasting there was no threat and it had been reduced to JV. How would it have looked politically, if we bailed like everyone else had weeks prior.
People that went to Libya and returned, days before the attack said it was a suicide mission, upon return, prior to the attack.
Fair enough, then. No quibble - and thanks for providing the citation, I shall strive to emulate that example.
Good news. It is weird to me that our own anti-Gaddafi forces didn't help. I don't know if they were just scared, inept, or in league with the terrorists. The Gaddafi loyalists had no love for the terrorists.
It's not "nothing". You're repeating the liberal "news" outlets' mantra. The report reveals a lot about the deplorable, shameful conduct of Hillary and the administration. They were more concerned about their image and legacy and the upcoming election than they were about Americans under attack. So concerned, that they lied about it for weeks afterward.
For example, see below:
Clinton, Obama and the bureaucrats that perpetrated this and then abandoned our people are a disgrace.
Clinton can claim all she wants that she never 'refused' a request for added security or assistance. Failure to respond is the same as refusal. She's so precise with her choice of words that every time she talks you know she's hiding something.
I don't forgive her not getting extra security or abandoning Benghazi like all the other countries when it became clear to everybody that the city was lost. But the idea that military personnel were ready to go but never got off the ground just pisses me off. We left those people to die while they quibbled about whether it would look bad diplomatically (and politically).
Good news. It is weird to me that our own anti-Gaddafi forces didn't help. I don't know if they were just scared, inept, or in league with the terrorists. The Gaddafi loyalists had no love for the terrorists.
If you are paid to protect the enemy of your enemy, you are disorganized and your territory is in a state of flux, how diligent can you expect?
Responsibility lies in our own poor planning, communication, and response from the CIA, dod, and state department.
Having an ambassador on the ground in a civil war is not normal protocol. Dare say his own ego may also factor into that equation
If you are paid to protect the enemy of your enemy, you are disorganized and your territory is in a state of flux, how diligent can you expect?
Responsibility lies in our own poor planning, communication, and response from the CIA, dod, and state department.
Having an ambassador on the ground in a civil war is not normal protocol. Dare say his own ego may also factor into that equation
The official line is that he was in Benghazi to help set up a new embassy there, and Hillary Clinton was planning on visiting in October. Meanwhile, the British and French abandoned their facilities there because it wasn't safe. The unofficial line is that he was there to arrange for arms to Libyan or Syrian Rebels. That seems more plausible of why he would go on that specific date knowing al Qaeda would love to attack on the anniversary of 9/11.
By ANY analysis this whole situation was a giant cluster on many, many levels. Who should accept responsibillty for this? If this is an example of Clinton's leadership perhaps it would be in our best interest to pass!
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.
