How did Obama mess up in Benghazi?

[sir drinks-a-lot]

So your defense of your post is to claim that your post was completely off topic? Or was it an attempt to dismiss the argument via poisoning the well? An ad hom perhaps?

The reverence is in your head.

EDIT: As for what the argument is, read the OP. What did Obama do wrong?

You must be new here. This forum isn't about "arguments". It's about finding new cool things that are great about Obama. Did you know he won a Grammy award? Pretty cool, huh? But then again, he's one cool dude, don't you think. And what about those Republicans? Boy, they're pretty dumb, aren't they? And, such racists...

Anyways, hope that helps. And welcome to JREF! We're skeptical. (about things other than the Obama Administration)

 

[balrog666]

He didn't. It's an excuse to disloyally attack the commander in chief.

Commanders-in-chief don't leave people to die when they can do something about it. Obama is pathetic, a loser-oriented, community-organizer-in-chief. Amd he never will be anything else.

 

[tyr_13]

You must be new here. This forum isn't about "arguments". It's about finding new cool things that are great about Obama. Did you know he won a Grammy award? Pretty cool, huh? But then again, he's one cool dude, don't you think. And what about those Republicans? Boy, they're pretty dumb, aren't they? And, such racists...

Anyways, hope that helps. And welcome to JREF! We're skeptical. (about things other than the Obama Administration)

So...you have nothing.

You have no valid argument, and when asked for one you resort to straw man claims and poisoning the well. After all, why trust anything that defends Obama in any way because any defense of him must be because we all love him, and the media something or other, plus religious you know. Moreover, even being critical of piss poor criticism of Obama must be the same even if they aren't actually defending him!

After all, you don't need 'reasoning' and 'evidence' as long as you can poison that well.

 

[Unabogie]

You must be new here. This forum isn't about "arguments". It's about finding new cool things that are great about Obama. Did you know he won a Grammy award? Pretty cool, huh? But then again, he's one cool dude, don't you think. And what about those Republicans? Boy, they're pretty dumb, aren't they? And, such racists...

Anyways, hope that helps. And welcome to JREF! We're skeptical. (about things other than the Obama Administration)

This post is as coherent as the accusations against Obama regarding Libya. Which is to say, it's an inchoate jumble of argle bargle.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Commanders-in-chief don't leave people to die when they can do something about it.

So you are alleging that Obama left people do die when he could have done something to prevent it?

First, I note that this accusation is something far different from the one Romney raised during the debate. (Again pointing to the fact that if there is any dogmatism here, it is in the commitment to the idea that Obama did something wrong, since the allegation of what he did wrong has changed.)

What exactly are you alleging Obama could have done to prevent the deaths of the ambassador and the others?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You must be new here. This forum isn't about "arguments". It's about finding new cool things that are great about Obama. Did you know he won a Grammy award? Pretty cool, huh? But then again, he's one cool dude, don't you think. And what about those Republicans? Boy, they're pretty dumb, aren't they? And, such racists...

Anyways, hope that helps. And welcome to JREF! We're skeptical. (about things other than the Obama Administration)

Do you know what it means to be skeptical? Can you characterize the relationship between evidence and skepticism of a claim?

Now, what is your claim as to what Obama did wrong in his handling of Benghazi, and what is your evidence to support your claim?

If you're making no such claim, then your criticism of this thread is just BS.

 

[SezMe]

Not to mention that the attack is a clear sign of the catastrophic failure of this administration's foreign policy.

Yeah, one bad incident in one location damns the administration's foreign policy for, oh, I don't know, China? Brazil? Lichtenstein? Good thing exaggeration is not against the OP.

I had a couple hours drive home today and so sampled the radio offerings. In the People's Republik of California (along the liberal coast) the first clear station I got had Rush on bleating about Benghazi. His complaint was not clear.

An hour or so later, the clearest signal offered up Beck. He proclaimed this incredibly convoluted scenario that had Petraeus falling on his sword for the honor of the good ol' US of A.

This Benghazi thing has become a obsession for the right wing. As far as I can tell there just isn't much there. Is it because the blabbers on hate radio have nothing else to complain about?

 

[fuelair]

So today's testimony reveals that the CIA told the White House that the death of Americans in Benghazi was caused by a spontaneous demonstration gone out of control. They then went and operated on that information for several days before they were informed it was actually an Al Qaeda attack planned before the demonstrations happened.

So exactly how did Obama and his cabinet screw up here? Are they not supposed to go by what intelligence the CIA gives them?

They won the election while black. And/or democrat.

 

[ravdin]

He didn't. It's an excuse to disloyally attack the commander in chief.

You should be ashamed of yourself for making this argument. The CIC is as subject to criticism as anyone else.

 

[ravdin]

Yeah, one bad incident in one location damns the administration's foreign policy for, oh, I don't know, China? Brazil? Lichtenstein? Good thing exaggeration is not against the OP.

I had a couple hours drive home today and so sampled the radio offerings. In the People's Republik of California (along the liberal coast) the first clear station I got had Rush on bleating about Benghazi. His complaint was not clear.

An hour or so later, the clearest signal offered up Beck. He proclaimed this incredibly convoluted scenario that had Petraeus falling on his sword for the honor of the good ol' US of A.

This Benghazi thing has become a obsession for the right wing. As far as I can tell there just isn't much there. Is it because the blabbers on hate radio have nothing else to complain about?

I wouldn't know. I don't listen to Limbaugh or Beck, and I'm not at all interested in anything they have to say.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

The CIC is as subject to criticism as anyone else.

I agree.

But that criticism should be 1) coherent and 2) based on the evidence.

Since the criticism started out as something Romney alleged about Obama not announcing to the public that it was a terrorist attack quickly enough, but then changed into allegations that Obama should have been able to prevent the attack or at least the killing of the ambassador and the others, and now to some silly CTs that Petraeus' resignation was somehow connected to Benghazi, it doesn't sound to me like it's either.

 

[Jimbo07]

This Benghazi thing has become a obsession for the right wing. As far as I can tell there just isn't much there. Is it because the blabbers on hate radio have nothing else to complain about?

This.

I'm not even a fan of the rabid left wing, but it doesn't take much to see that what the right has is stupidity.

I've been meaning to ask about this issue, because all that our Fox News loop on the monitors at work play is Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. They're setting themselves up to look like cretinous morons.

It's bizarre.

 

[balrog666]

This.

I'm not even a fan of the rabid left wing, but it doesn't take much to see that what the right has is stupidity.

I've been meaning to ask about this issue, because all that our Fox News loop on the monitors at work play is Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. They're setting themselves up to look like cretinous morons.

It's bizarre.

It is against the law to deal with Al Qaeda. Even for the Total Zero.

So this scandal is more like Iran-Contra ... except with real dead Americans - and an openly lying president, an openly lying ambassador, an openly lying vice-president, the Sec of State vacillating before running hard in the opposite direction, a non-consulate "consulate" exposed, an illegal CIA operation of gun running directly to Al Qaeda and other jihadists exposed, multiple CIA ops-within-an-op exposed, an illegal CIA prison exposed, and hanky-panky spanky and potential blackmail and foreign spy-running going on everywhere in plain sight ... and with, presumably, a great many more details to be revealed soon ... and all with the scumbag leftists idiots to blame at every turn!!

What's not like??

I can't wait for the books!!

 

[Orphia Nay]

I've heard it suggested that Obama should have sent a drone to attack the attackers. But the attackers were at the consulate. So what, they wanted the drone to attack the very people who were under attack?

This. And if he'd done this, he'd be criticised till eternity.

What exactly should Obama have done?

 

[Normal Dude]

This. And if he'd done this, he'd be criticised till eternity.

What exactly should Obama have done?

Not gotten in the way of Republican plans?

Because that's what this manufactured controversy really boils down to.

 

[PhantomWolf]

It is against the law to deal with Al Qaeda. Even for the Total Zero.

So this scandal is more like Iran-Contra ... except with real dead Americans - and an openly lying president, an openly lying ambassador, an openly lying vice-president, the Sec of State vacillating before running hard in the opposite direction, a non-consulate "consulate" exposed, an illegal CIA operation of gun running directly to Al Qaeda and other jihadists exposed, multiple CIA ops-within-an-op exposed, an illegal CIA prison exposed, and hanky-panky spanky and potential blackmail and foreign spy-running going on everywhere in plain sight ... and with, presumably, a great many more details to be revealed soon ... and all with the scumbag leftists idiots to blame at every turn!!

What's not like??

I can't wait for the books!!

Last I checked the CT forum was that way ---->

 

[tyr_13]

It is against the law to deal with Al Qaeda. Even for the Total Zero.

So this scandal is more like Iran-Contra ... except with real dead Americans - and an openly lying president, an openly lying ambassador, an openly lying vice-president, the Sec of State vacillating before running hard in the opposite direction, a non-consulate "consulate" exposed, an illegal CIA operation of gun running directly to Al Qaeda and other jihadists exposed, multiple CIA ops-within-an-op exposed, an illegal CIA prison exposed, and hanky-panky spanky and potential blackmail and foreign spy-running going on everywhere in plain sight ... and with, presumably, a great many more details to be revealed soon ... and all with the scumbag leftists idiots to blame at every turn!!

What's not like??

I can't wait for the books!!

You don't plan on explaining any of this, but if the 'lies' are so 'open' then you'll have no trouble pointing to them.

But because all you're doing is throwing out all the straw grabbing accusations that have been put forward, you'll not be able to do that.

 

[Jimbo07]

So this scandal is more like Iran-Contra ... except with real dead Americans - and an openly lying president, an openly lying ambassador, an openly lying vice-president, the Sec of State vacillating before running hard in the opposite direction, a non-consulate "consulate" exposed, an illegal CIA operation of gun running directly to Al Qaeda and other jihadists exposed, multiple CIA ops-within-an-op exposed, an illegal CIA prison exposed, and hanky-panky spanky and potential blackmail and foreign spy-running going on everywhere in plain sight ... and with, presumably, a great many more details to be revealed soon ... and all with the scumbag leftists idiots to blame at every turn!!

I don't even think John McCain is alleging all of that, and he's going bonkers, as is!

Last I checked the CT forum was that way ---->

At least...

 

[Travis]

Commanders-in-chief don't leave people to die when they can do something about it. Obama is pathetic, a loser-oriented, community-organizer-in-chief. Amd he never will be anything else.

Interesting. Wrong, but interesting. Leaving people to die is something that could conceivably happen is not necessarily wrong.

Back in 2002ish the military decided not to rescue a stranded Air Force Airman because they felt any rescue would simply put too many other forces at risk. That man was captured and killed by the Taliban.

But I have yet to hear any evidence that Obama actually did this.

You should be ashamed of yourself for making this argument. The CIC is as subject to criticism as anyone else.

But is the CIC right to be subject to unfair criticism?

It is against the law to deal with Al Qaeda. Even for the Total Zero.

So this scandal is more like Iran-Contra ... except with real dead Americans - and an openly lying president, an openly lying ambassador, an openly lying vice-president, the Sec of State vacillating before running hard in the opposite direction, a non-consulate "consulate" exposed, an illegal CIA operation of gun running directly to Al Qaeda and other jihadists exposed, multiple CIA ops-within-an-op exposed, an illegal CIA prison exposed, and hanky-panky spanky and potential blackmail and foreign spy-running going on everywhere in plain sight ... and with, presumably, a great many more details to be revealed soon ... and all with the scumbag leftists idiots to blame at every turn!!

What's not like??

I can't wait for the books!!

What are these open lies you talk about?

 

[NoahFence]

All I know its Obama lied, and for people died.
I'm voting for these four who can't, our somethin.