AC-130 Gunship - Benghazi Attack

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 6:52 pm

Sudden Sam wrote:What possible reason could the administration have for not assisting the embassy staff after the attack began?

I can't come up with any scenario where any good could come of their decision.

Sometimes there isn't a good outcome. There are only less bad outcomes. I can think of number of reasons why they would have sold out the people on the ground. Have you forgotten Eagle Claw and Blackhawk Down? I know Hillary at least remembers the latter. Also remember they knew for real who and what they were up against (a heavily armed Islamist militia group), so they would have to factor in organized and alert resistance on some level. IMO, there is a significant risk of an operation like that going pear shaped and resulting in a complete bloodbath. That's a tactical reason for not going.

The quote from Jay Carney outlines their political motivation.

“This is a fairly volatile situation, and it is in response not to United States policy, obviously not to the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video, a film, that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting — that in no way justifies any violent reaction to it.”
-Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

Deflecting criticism away from the administration is their primary political objective. Obviously if a rescue operation ran into a blizzard of rocket, mortar and MANPADS fire and a bloodbath ensued leveling half the city, it would be rather difficult to make the story disappear down the memory hole.

Obviously a call was made that the risk of failure outweighed the lives of the people on the ground and they were left to fend for themselves. Sucks to be them...or anyone else who might one day find themselves in similar circumstances.

Plus Curious Barry needed to get some shuteye. It was going to be a big day tomorrow! He was going to take a fun plane ride to Las Vegas!! Hooray! Curious Barry loves plane rides! He also likes mingling with celebrities! That's almost as much fun as golf. He really doesn't like that boring 'terrorists burning up US Ambassadors and looting their consulates' stuff. Curious Barry doesn't know why anybody would care about boring stuff that isn't fun. He just wishes people would stop talking about it and pretend it never happened!

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:49 pm

31 years ago: nice contrast:

In August 1981 two Libyan fighter planes jumped a pair of F-14 Tomcats which were part of a naval exercise in the Gulf of Sidra; one fired a sidewinder missile. The Tomcats then shot the Libyan planes down.
The encounter happened in the morning Libya time, at night California time; President Reagan, in Los Angeles for a party, had gone to bed and did not learn of it until early the next day. His attitude was, there was no decision for him to make: The American fighters, and the battle group they belonged to, had their rules of engagement, which the fighter pilots had followed. At the time, George Will wrote, “When a horse flicks off a fly, it’s a crisis for the fly, not the horse.”
Reagan wasn’t told, yet we responded. Obama was told, yet we didn’t.

Carson · Post by **Carson** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:29 am

mvscal wrote:Plus Curious Barry needed to get some shuteye. It was going to be a big day tomorrow! He was going to take a fun plane ride to Las Vegas!! Hooray! Curious Barry loves plane rides! He also likes mingling with celebrities! That's almost as much fun as golf. He really doesn't like that boring 'terrorists burning up US Ambassadors and looting their consulates' stuff. Curious Barry doesn't know why anybody would care about boring stuff that isn't fun. He just wishes people would stop talking about it and pretend it never happened!

This would have been the greatest episode of Captain Kangaroo ever.

Derron · Post by **Derron** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 5:44 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6M9y7Hy ... e=youtu.be

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:03 am

Really?

WASHINGTON (AP) - CIA security officers went to the aid of State Department staff less than 25 minutes after they got the first call for help during the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday as they laid out a detailed timeline of the CIA's immediate response to the attack.

The attack on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks on the United States by what is now suspected to be a group of al-Qaida-linked militants killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

The timeline was offered just days before Tuesday's presidential election in a clear effort to refute recent news reports that said the CIA told its personnel to "stand down" rather than go to the consulate to help repel the attackers.

The officials told reporters that when the CIA annex received a call saying the consulate was under attack less than a mile (1.6 kilometers) away, about half a dozen members of a CIA security team tried to get heavy weapons and other assistance from the Libyans.

But when none was available, they went ahead with the rescue attempt. The officials said that at no point was the team told to wait.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to provide intelligence information publicly.

The Obama administration's response to the attack on the consulate has been challenged by Republicans in Congress and elsewhere, questioning whether enough military and other support was requested and received.

And it has become an issue in the election, with President Barack Obama's Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, and Republican lawmakers accusing the White House of misleading Americans about the nature of the attack.

Initial descriptions of the attack suggested that it may have been linked to a protest over an American-made anti-Muslim film.

On Thursday, intelligence officials said they had early information that the attackers had ties to al-Qaida-linked groups, but did not make it public immediately because it was based on classified intelligence. And they said the early public comments about the attack and its genesis were cautious and limited, as they routinely are in such incidents.

They added that while intelligence officials indicated early on that extremists were involved in the assault, only later were officials able to confirm that the attack was not generated by a protest over the film.

So, Obummer's foreign policy is to assume all terrorist attacks are a result of youtube videos that few Arabs have seen, until proven otherwise?

Really?

THIS is the latest twist in trying to dig out of the mountain of lies they've told to date?

"We're going to assume any attacks on our embassies are because of some rarely seen video, and not an organized effort, until we can establish otherwise."

On Thursday, intelligence officials said they had early information that the attackers had ties to al-Qaida-linked groups, but did not make it public immediately because it was based on classified intelligence.

So, what strategic advantage was gained by not confirming that the attackers were who everyone knew it was from the getgo? I'm going go with... "none."

So, after the intial round of proven lies, the new story is "we knew beforehand it was al Qaida."

Well then Genius-in-Chief, why the fuck didn't you... oh, I dunno... send some reenforcements?

Even when these clowns have had a month and a half to get their lies figured out, they STILL can't come up with one that makes sense.

Just complete incompetance, followed up by lie after lie after lie after lie.

Yup folks -- this is the tool you elected to our highest office.

Nice job.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:08 am

Felix wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
We know FOR FACT the administration, at some level, told a flagrant lie.

link?

Feeling stupid yet? You should... it was documented from the beginning. But since the GOP is using it against Obummer, it must not be true, since you hate the GOP... dumbass.

They've now ADMITTED to it, dumbass. Not that it wasn't their only option once the lies started flwoing like wine, but at least they've taken the baby step of admitting it...

Not without a feeble, doesn't-add-up-to-any-sort-of-logic, moronic attempt at trying to justify it, but at least they admit to lying about it.

But congrats on your ability to keep your party-blinders on through this whole thing, to the bitter end... they look good on you.

How's that Most Transparent Administration In History That Admits They Lie thing working for you?

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:03 am

Dinsdale wrote:

since you hate the GOP

what ever gave you the idea I hate the GOP? some pretty dece people in the party (Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Richard Lugar) but the GOP has been hijacked by the ultra right wing and decent republicans are almost non-existent....the current crop of republicans are nothing but far right obstructionist asswipes that wouldn't even make good dog catchers, let alone representatives, senators, or president....they have no interest in doing anything to help the middle class.....if they get in they are going to push this country over the fiscal cliff while feeding off the financial carcass of our economy....

They've now ADMITTED to it, dumbass.

link?

But congrats on your ability to keep your party-blinders on through this whole thing, to the bitter end... they look good on you.

get this through your fucking skull moron.....I'm not voting for obama.....it's the same statement I've been making for the past year....I have no confidence in the current white house, but I can't bring myself to vote for a fucking skeezball like romney....I may be looking for real estate by marty if that douchenozzle is sworn in as POTUS....he's a fucking weasel and if he's elected this country will have made one of the biggest fucking mistakes in modern history....

you can bank on it.....

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:11 am

Felix wrote:the current crop of republicans are nothing but far right obstructionist asswipes

Obstructionist? Seat a Republican president and GOP majorities in both houses and you'll fast change your tune. Not that you would appreciate the results...

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 5:51 am

Truman wrote:Not that you would appreciate the results...

oh I can appreciate the results of republican economics, we're just starting to right the disaster that was the previous 8 years of republican economics.....so what's mitts economic plan? i've been looking for it for months and can't seem to find it.....lots of buzz words, promises, threats, etc., but a tad low on specifics.....

the plain truth of it is, you have no idea what his plan is, because he doesn't have one.....but, he's got most of Bush's economic advisors surrounding him, so I'm assuming he plans on employing the trickle down economic plan which has never worked, and never will work, but you'll guzzle it for no other reason than "it's not obama"....

look, if you could make a case for electing romney, I'd listen....but the fact is, not one republican I've talked to can provide me with any reason whatsoever as to why I should vote for him....they can't even justify their own support for mittens.....

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:07 am

When We Deceive

So far the administration has attributed its lapses to the “fog of war” and suggestions that only the Tripoli embassy not the Benghazi consulate was deemed vulnerable. Now, from a recent cable, we know that the latter was untrue, and that the only fog of war consisted in a handful of administration spokespeople frantically trying to get their stories straight. Real-time aerial video of a battle is not the fog of Wellington trying to figure out where Napoleon will strike next.

The central issue of the entire Libyan debacle remains motive: Why did the administration ignore repeated warnings of the vulnerability of our people on the ground, and of likely Islamist attacks? Then, in the middle of a video-filmed assault, why were they frozen into inaction as Americans fought to the death, Alamo style? And then why in the aftermath did they they fob culpability off on an obscure two-month-old video, and arrest the director on trumped-up probation charges? And why now do they have no fallback narrative other than silence?

Rack!

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:36 am

Felix wrote:oh I can appreciate the results of republican economics, we're just starting to right the disaster that was the previous 8 years of republican economics....

Before I go further, I'll reiterate -- I HATE the GOP.

At present, I hate the dems more, but I've done plenty of hating on both in my life. So my position comes from that of a neutral observer.

The "disaster" you mention isn't "the previous 8 years of republican economics." Not even close.

The current hurt we're feeling was a result of the feel-good "let's make everyone just a little more equal" policies of the 90's, which was a dem idea, which was fully endorsed by the repubs (with evil concessions to make them buy in). Anyone who thinks it wasn't a bipartisan effort is a fucking idiot.

Putting a special interest group in charge of who Fannie and Freddie should back loans for? (The fed has no business in the mortgage industry, and only a retard thinks they do.). Pure genius. But wait...

remind me again who the superstar lawyer who dictated where the loans went was again?

I'm trying to remember his name...

Wait, it's coming back to me now...

His name was Barack Obama.

No one save for Billy J Clinton was more implicit in our current mess than Barry O... but retards decided to vote fr the off-the-charts corrupt Chicago politician... let's not discount the ignorance factor in our current situation.

But don't worry -- the liberal mantra of "everyone deserves a college education" is another bubble that's about to burst. The liberal ideology isn't based in reality.

So, since the election, unfortunately, is an either/or proposition, should you endorse one of the supporters and henchmen of the people who created the economic collapse, and advocates attempting to keep the bubbles inflating...

or the othe guy?

Pretty much a no-brainer.

And to top it off, I'm pretty sure Douche Romney has never sat idly by while watching Americans who begged him for help died on webcam, then lied and lied and lied and lied about it afterwards.

But since you brought up Romnomics -- what cash value do you place on the life of my local homeboy who fought to the death at the embassy... the one Obama sacrificed for political gain... the one whose parents said that Obummer wouldn't look them in the eye when he tried to pander to them in a photo-op? The one whose parent have a roadside monument decrying that POS a couple miles up the road from me?

How many people has Mittens the Douche killed? How many lies has he told trying to cover up his negligent homicide?

Since there's a pathetic two choices, and one has PROVEN himself evil, is there really a choice?

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:00 am

Felix wrote:
Truman wrote:Not that you would appreciate the results...
oh I can appreciate the results of republican economics, we're just starting to right the disaster that was the previous 8 years of republican economics.....so what's mitts economic plan? i've been looking for it for months and can't seem to find it.....lots of buzz words, promises, threats, etc., but a tad low on specifics.....

the plain truth of it is, you have no idea what his plan is, because he doesn't have one.....but, he's got most of Bush's economic advisors surrounding him, so I'm assuming he plans on employing the trickle down economic plan which has never worked, and never will work, but you'll guzzle it for no other reason than "it's not obama"....

look, if you could make a case for electing romney, I'd listen....but the fact is, not one republican I've talked to can provide me with any reason whatsoever as to why I should vote for him....they can't even justify their own support for mittens.....

As soon as you see some knuckle-dragger use the words, "trickle-down" you know he hasn't a fucking clue what he's talking about.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:09 pm

DrDetroit wrote:As soon as you see some knuckle-dragger use the words, "trickle-down" you know he hasn't a fucking clue what he's talking about.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 2:24 pm

BTW, David Stockman has a lengthy but interesting opinion piece on Mitt Romney, the "job creator" (actually an excerpt from a forthcoming book):

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... drain.html

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:15 pm

Felix wrote:the current crop of republicans are nothing but far right obstructionist asswipes that wouldn't even make good dog catchers, let alone representatives, senators, or president.

You can fuck off now.

Reid says he can't work with Romney

Five days before the election, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has ruled out trying to work with Mitt Romney should he win next week.

"Mitt Romney's fantasy that Senate Democrats will work with him to pass his 'severely conservative' agenda is laughable," Mr. Reid said in a statement on Friday

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/ins ... rk-romney/

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:59 pm

mvscal wrote:

You can fuck off now.

I mean, who throws veterans under the bus?

why the republicans, that's who....obstructionist politics at it's absolute worst....

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:15 pm

Felix wrote:
mvscal wrote:

You can fuck off now.
I mean, who throws veterans under the bus?

why the republicans, that's who....obstructionist politics at it's absolute worst....

If you want to talk about getting thrown under the bus, you ought to talk to Ambassador Stevens. Oh wait, he's dead. Nevermind.

Of course your pinheaded editorial is complete horseshit. Nobody is throwing veterans under the bus. There are already at least half a dozen programs in place to help veterans find work. Strange how he didn't mention that little factoid. Actually it isn't. He's writing for morons. You know...like you.

I also can't help but wonder who Harry Reid is going to throw under the bus when he begins his campaign of obstructionism. You really are weak bitch.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 pm

mvscal wrote:Of course your pinheaded editorial is complete horseshit. Nobody is throwing veterans under the bus. There are already at least half a dozen programs in place to help veterans find work. Strange how he didn't mention that little factoid. Actually it isn't. He's writing for morons. You know...like you.

I also can't help but wonder who Harry Reid is going to throw under the bus when he begins his campaign of obstructionism. You really are weak bitch.

Notwithstanding massive hiring preferences, er, entitlements in federal hiring regulations.

Derron · Post by **Derron** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:21 pm

Felix wrote:..I may be looking for real estate by marty if that douchenozzle is sworn in as POTUS....he's a fucking weasel and if he's elected this country will have made one of the biggest fucking mistakes in modern history....

Need any help packing ? I am sure we could come up with some help or some cash to help you hire some Frenchies to help you move, hopefully to where there is no internet access.

I like your attitude...maybe you could pass it around to the rest of you loser liberal fuck bags and get the fuck out of the country you hate so much. It is sure to be a great improvement.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:24 pm

Everyone is welcome in Canada.

We are a civilised nation.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:35 pm

Martyred wrote:Everyone is welcome in Canada.

We are a civilised nation.

Oh, yes, you are...what with your censorship laws protecting the sensitive feelings of radial muslims.

Been to Canada, many times, and I ain't going back.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:08 pm

Sudden Sam wrote:The two men died because they painted laser targets on the jihadi mortar nests. ... We have learned from experts that American Special Forces paint such laser targets only when air cover is immediately available, as it gives away your position to the enemy.

Wrong or at least misleading. GLDs can only give away your position to an enemy equipped with nightvision devices or other IR viewing capability. Against the diaperheads we've been fighting for the last decade or so the reason you only paint the target when you have CAS on station or Copperheads available is to preserve battery life.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:23 pm

DrDetroit wrote: radial muslims.

Did you mean muslim radials?

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:08 am

DrDetroit wrote: Real-time aerial video of a battle is not the fog of Wellington trying to figure out where Napoleon will strike next.

You have to love Hanson for his 'credibility' asides.

'I had WAFFLES for lunch, I was hungry as Hannibal's elephant!' <<<< HISTORY, LADIES AND GENTS

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:23 am

Dr_Phibes wrote:
DrDetroit wrote: Real-time aerial video of a battle is not the fog of Wellington trying to figure out where Napoleon will strike next.

You have to love Hanson for his 'credibility' asides.

'I had WAFFLES for lunch, I was hungry as Hannibal's elephant!' <<<< HISTORY, LADIES AND GENTS

Stop it Phibes!

Don't you know that Benghazi was a pivotal battle between nuclear-tipped, poison-dipped jihadist special forces strike teams and America's bulwark of freedom?

It was like the battle of Kursk...or Dien Bien Phu...

...complete with the "pting!" sound of bullets ricocheting off walls like spitwads ringing spittoons in old Warner Bros. cartoons.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:24 am

It was the worst battle ever fought on land.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:38 am

DrDetroit wrote: as Americans fought to the death, Alamo style

Apparently

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:10 am

Dr_Phibes wrote:
DrDetroit wrote: as Americans fought to the death, Alamo style
Apparently

Two of them did at least. I'm sure they took a more than a few whacked out fundies with them.

The Alamo prose is pure purple, though. The bare facts are damning enough.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:25 am

mvscal wrote:I'm sure they took a more than a few whacked out fundies with them.

If your mythologies help you sleep better at night, I'll refrain from messing with them.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:56 am

so this thread has been going on long enough have the crazy right wing losers realized Fox News conned them on this issue?

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:04 am

we're making progress, felice- btw. at least now you can admit it's an issue

-forward... imo

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:23 am

When Cuda starts scoring points off you, it's time to just lay back and relax into your role as a light speedbag workout for the feeble.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:31 am

Bizzarofelice wrote:so this thread has been going on long enough have the crazy right wing losers realized Fox News conned them on this issue?

They've got something though, even if it is hypocritical. The admin got busted disseminating propaganda designed to denigrate people, in order to make it easier to hate them. It would be an interesting subject if it were dealt with on that level, the technical distribution of propaganda - but it won't be, that would just be uncomfortable for everyone.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:48 am

Dr_Phibes wrote:The admin got busted disseminating propaganda designed to denigrate people, in order to make it easier to hate them.

What makes that unusual is that this propaganda was designed to denigrate our own people.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:55 am

Well you're shifting from hard to soft power, there's bound to be conflicts.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:34 pm

Bizzarofelice wrote:so this thread has been going on long enough have the crazy right wing losers realized Fox News conned them on this issue?

umm, what?

spit that black cock out of your mouth long enough to post a coherent sentence, you meth addicted gibbering baboon.

and then watch this, since you have the attention span of a gnat and can't seem to comprehend the words posted in plain English prevalent thru-out this thread.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:47 pm

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:57 pm

War Wagon wrote:
and then watch this, since you have the attention span of a gnat and can't seem to comprehend the words posted in plain English prevalent thru-out this thread.

take off the tinfoil hat bud

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:38 pm

take off the blinders and the 'see no evil, hear no evil' mentality and I might lose the tinfoil hat.

Fact is, you can't refute a word of what was said in that clip. You wish you could, but those pesky facts keep getting in the way.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:42 pm

The Obama/Benghazi deal is the most impotent, wet firecracker of an "October Surprise" I have ever witnessed.

This is embarrassing. C'mon GOP...