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.
The guy has spook written all over him. YOu really think it is standard for an Ambassador to slip into a war torn country on a foreign ship and set up liaison with the rebels?
So now Stevens was a super sleuth, CIA terrorism expert. Geez, whatever it takes to make the disgraceful 0bama look better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
Ambassador's make policy decisions all the time when it comes to their own location. No way he was ordered to Benghazi. The only tidbit I have read is that he was escaping the expected demonstrations in Tripoli.
YOu guys are simply trying to find fault with Obama when it is reasonably obvious everything rationally doable was done.
The only real complaint you can make is also silly. He did delay a complete discussion of what was going on in Benghazi. He did not want to mention that the annex was obviously defended by CIA mercenaries with machine guns on the roof.
Stevens was so low on the totem pole, that he could not even get the security personnel he was SCREAMING for over six months, and yet you think he was so powerful that he was authorized to set policy????
Okay, here is Stevens trying to affect some policy: "GET ME MORE SECURITY PERSONNEL!!!!!" Hmmmm, no one was listening to him, guess he was just a negotiator, with no power to make any decisions about anything at all.
Even though you are trying to excuse 0bama, you do seem to be struggling to think this thru, but you need to think it thru a little more.
And it is reasonably clear why not. There was good insight as to what was happening. The attack at the Consulate ended and the US took back the site. They search for the Ambassador unsuccessfully and then left with all the remaining Americans. The US drone could see that the aggressors had left the site. And the US detail that took it back could confirm that.
Then there was a long quiet period during which reinforcements arrived from Tripoli. A couple of military and five or six CIA types. All combat types. After deciding it unwise to attempt to get the Ambassador from the hospital they set about getting all the Americans out of there. Probably the big delay was cleaning up the site. Early in the morning as they were getting ready to move out they came under mortar attack. I have seen no reports of anything else. When the mortars stopped they left. I doubt the Americans ever had anything to fire at. At no time was there really an opportunity to summon more forces to assist.
The whole thing was an unfortunate mess and some good people died. That is how war is...particularly the war on terror.
So now Stevens was a super sleuth, CIA terrorism expert. Geez, whatever it takes to make the disgraceful 0bama look better.
Stevens was so low on the totem pole, that he could not even get the security personnel he was SCREAMING for over six months, and yet you think he was so powerful that he was authorized to set policy????
Okay, here is Stevens trying to affect some policy: "GET ME MORE SECURITY PERSONNEL!!!!!" Hmmmm, no one was listening to him, guess he was just a negotiator, with no power to make any decisions about anything at all.
Even though you are trying to excuse 0bama, you do seem to be struggling to think this thru, but you need to think it thru a little more.
The decision to be in Benghazi was Stevens. If he was unhappy with the security he could simply have stayed in Tripoli.
I would think that the size of the security force is always an issue between the Ambassadors and HQ particularly in a dangerous post. Note that there is no way to actually provide sufficient security to prevent an embassy falling. See Teheran. Only the local government can provide that level...and in some cases they cannot or will not.
Another option under consideration was to simply close the consulate as the British did. Apparently Stevens did not care for that idea as no such missives from him have come forth.
The decision to be in Benghazi was Stevens. If he was unhappy with the security he could simply have stayed in Tripoli.
He had a duty to perform, and he did it. I think he believed that the people back in Washington would not let him down. After all, he had a safe room in the consulate, where he could wait to be rescued if things went badly. too bad no one came.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
I would think that the size of the security force is always an issue between the Ambassadors and HQ particularly in a dangerous post. Note that there is no way to actually provide sufficient security to prevent an embassy falling. See Teheran. Only the local government can provide that level...and in some cases they cannot or will not.
Another option under consideration was to simply close the consulate as the British did. Apparently Stevens did not care for that idea as no such missives from him have come forth.
If his bosses back in Washington listened to his reports, and their own intelligence reports, and they thought Benghazi was dangerous, they would have beefed up security, not cut it, and then after all that, if it was still determined unsafe, they would have ordered it closed.
None of those decisions were Stevens' to make, his was to do his duty for the president until told otherwise. Stevens really felt that he was the best person to help bring peace, it was his honor and his dedication that got him assigned to that position. I seriously doubt t he wanted to let the president, his country, or the people of Libya down.
Once again, the president went to war in Libya. He destroyed their military, dissolved their government. The only reason Obama can claim he was not aware of ANY security concerns in Libya, or the previous attacks in Libya, was because he did not care enough to ask. Remember, it's only barely over a year since Qaddafi was executed, and Obama could not maintain enough interest in Libya, or the people he sent there for even nine months?
The guy has spook written all over him. YOu really think it is standard for an Ambassador to slip into a war torn country on a foreign ship and set up liaison with the rebels?
Ambassador's make policy decisions all the time when it comes to their own location. No way he was ordered to Benghazi. The only tidbit I have read is that he was escaping the expected demonstrations in Tripoli.
YOu guys are simply trying to find fault with Obama when it is reasonably obvious everything rationally doable was done.
The only real complaint you can make is also silly. He did delay a complete discussion of what was going on in Benghazi. He did not want to mention that the annex was obviously defended by CIA mercenaries with machine guns on the roof.
You forget what he did in follow up is a huge issue that snowballed this thing.
Only himself to blame for that.
He is an amatuer.
You forget what he did in follow up is a huge issue that snowballed this thing.
Only himself to balme for that.
He is an amatuer.
What he did was probably correct. That the people involved were CIA and that the CIA was running some operation out of the Benghazi annex was not something that should ever have come up.
And it was dragged up by the Right which forced it into the light of day. Now we have to deal with whatever fallout comes from that outcome.
Was it a big deal? We will never know. Let us hope it was a minor thing and we did not end up getting a mess of people killed.
Blaming it all on a video which was easily show to be false was amatuer as noted....as well as offensive to the US citizenry.
What would you have liked? "We had a nest of spies in Libya with heavy weapons helping various factions to control the government"? You Libyans should shoot anyone dealing with the consulate in Benghazi?
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.
