(02-22-2019, 08:01 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-21-2019, 11:58 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]Did someone in the government leave the victims in Beirut hanging on for nine hours without sending nearby troops to help like was done in the case of Benghazi?
Did anyone die waiting in Benghazi? The survivors were relieved by Americans arriving by ground transport from Tripoli. I can only assume you're trying to say that relief should have been brought in by air and that that would have saved someone's life. I'm pretty sure they showed over and over again that are relief would not have gotten their significantly sooner that no one died in the time frame between the two. If a mistake was made, it was made days and weeks before the attack, not having sources of relief close enough. Also it seems the state department and CIA didn't know how many armed hostile people there were in the area. The investigations were not able to show that mistakes were made the night of the attack.
It amazes me how disconnected civilians can be to how the military, intelligence, and State Department operate in hostile territory or even in general. There are well established processes and intertwined information pathways. Not a fly by night operation. We have to consider current and future possibilities while staying within the confines of domestic, international, and country laws. Your info is wrong on so many levels but I can only address public released, unclassified ...
1.) Plenty of resources in the area to reach out and touch someone. Perhaps even some “cannot confirm, nor deny”.
2.) No team is traveling 400+ miles on the ground faster than in the air. Ground relief was actually after main attack by CIA ops in “area”.
3.) Special Ops was in place and on standby weeks before incident at the request of the Embassy because security teams were swapping out and a vacuum would be left at Embassy for approx. 3 weeks. The Libyan military was also aware. We have had no official arrangements with Libya to keep any type of military presence on their land except as it relates to our property at the embassy grounds. It’s the usual political nightmare. Reason for some distant resources.
4. ) Multiple MAJCOMs told to stay hands off. SPECOPS told to stand down multiple times.
5. ) The State Department was well aware of the hostility in the area and there are daily intelligence briefs. The info is forwarded up the chain to State Department. See #3.
6. ) Investigation did in fact show mistakes made the night of and leading up to. The Obama dream team got another hard pass on responsibility.
(02-22-2019, 11:30 AM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2019, 08:01 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Did anyone die waiting in Benghazi? The survivors were relieved by Americans arriving by ground transport from Tripoli. I can only assume you're trying to say that relief should have been brought in by air and that that would have saved someone's life. I'm pretty sure they showed over and over again that are relief would not have gotten their significantly sooner that no one died in the time frame between the two. If a mistake was made, it was made days and weeks before the attack, not having sources of relief close enough. Also it seems the state department and CIA didn't know how many armed hostile people there were in the area. The investigations were not able to show that mistakes were made the night of the attack.
Yes, several people died waiting in Benghazi. Were you asleep during the entire Obama administration?
The Beirut attack was the first of it's kind, in a country that was considered friendly to the US. There was no logical reason to expect the US to prepare for such an attack beforehand. Benghazi happened after decades of terror attacks on US citizens, on the very same date as the most infamous previous terror attack, and in a country that was NOT friendly to the US. A lack of sufficient defense there was an avoidable failure, along with the lack of timely response once the attack was known, and the lies about the video afterwards. BTW, while some may have claimed otherwise, those lies went on for a week before they were finally put to rest, and the maker of the video was nonetheless charged with inciting the attack.
So your comparison is Apples vs. Lawn Chairs.
I put carefully considered subordinate clauses in most of my sentences.
You subtract them out, to make the sentences that remain false, and then accuse me of lies or ignorance.
I don't know if you're struggling to read, or if you have malice.
(02-22-2019, 12:00 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2019, 08:01 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Did anyone die waiting in Benghazi? The survivors were relieved by Americans arriving by ground transport from Tripoli. I can only assume you're trying to say that relief should have been brought in by air and that that would have saved someone's life. I'm pretty sure they showed over and over again that are relief would not have gotten their significantly sooner that no one died in the time frame between the two. If a mistake was made, it was made days and weeks before the attack, not having sources of relief close enough. Also it seems the state department and CIA didn't know how many armed hostile people there were in the area. The investigations were not able to show that mistakes were made the night of the attack.
It amazes me how disconnected civilians can be to how the military, intelligence, and State Department operate in hostile territory or even in general. There are well established processes and intertwined information pathways. Not a fly by night operation. We have to consider current and future possibilities while staying within the confines of domestic, international, and country laws. Your info is wrong on so many levels but I can only address public released, unclassified ...
1.) Plenty of resources in the area to reach out and touch someone. Perhaps even some “cannot confirm, nor deny”.
2.) No team is traveling 400+ miles on the ground faster than in the air. Ground relief was actually after main attack by CIA ops in “area”.
3.) Special Ops was in place and on standby weeks before incident at the request of the Embassy because security teams were swapping out and a vacuum would be left at Embassy for approx. 3 weeks. The Libyan military was also aware. We have had no official arrangements with Libya to keep any type of military presence on their land except as it relates to our property at the embassy grounds. It’s the usual political nightmare. Reason for some distant resources.
4. ) Multiple MAJCOMs told to stay hands off. SPECOPS told to stand down multiple times.
5. ) The State Department was well aware of the hostility in the area and there are daily intelligence briefs. The info is forwarded up the chain to State Department. See #3.
6. ) Investigation did in fact show mistakes made the night of and leading up to. The Obama dream team got another hard pass on responsibility.
Those are some pretty heavy allegations to not have links behind them.
Hopefully links to the original text of the house or senate committee reports.
Anyhow most of that's not relevant to my actual point. There were 7 Congressional investigations into Benghazi.
the Republican party does not get to complain about Adam Schiff starting the first partisan investigation into Russian interference or unconstitutional emoluments or tax evasion. Maybe they get to complain after the 8th one. The first seven are fair play.
Who changed the talking points? I'll wait.
(02-22-2019, 01:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2019, 11:30 AM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, several people died waiting in Benghazi. Were you asleep during the entire Obama administration?
The Beirut attack was the first of it's kind, in a country that was considered friendly to the US. There was no logical reason to expect the US to prepare for such an attack beforehand. Benghazi happened after decades of terror attacks on US citizens, on the very same date as the most infamous previous terror attack, and in a country that was NOT friendly to the US. A lack of sufficient defense there was an avoidable failure, along with the lack of timely response once the attack was known, and the lies about the video afterwards. BTW, while some may have claimed otherwise, those lies went on for a week before they were finally put to rest, and the maker of the video was nonetheless charged with inciting the attack.
So your comparison is Apples vs. Lawn Chairs.
I put carefully considered subordinate clauses in most of my sentences.
You subtract them out, to make the sentences that remain false, and then accuse me of lies or ignorance.
I don't know if you're struggling to read, or if you have malice.
(02-22-2019, 12:00 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]It amazes me how disconnected civilians can be to how the military, intelligence, and State Department operate in hostile territory or even in general. There are well established processes and intertwined information pathways. Not a fly by night operation. We have to consider current and future possibilities while staying within the confines of domestic, international, and country laws. Your info is wrong on so many levels but I can only address public released, unclassified ...
1.) Plenty of resources in the area to reach out and touch someone. Perhaps even some “cannot confirm, nor deny”.
2.) No team is traveling 400+ miles on the ground faster than in the air. Ground relief was actually after main attack by CIA ops in “area”.
3.) Special Ops was in place and on standby weeks before incident at the request of the Embassy because security teams were swapping out and a vacuum would be left at Embassy for approx. 3 weeks. The Libyan military was also aware. We have had no official arrangements with Libya to keep any type of military presence on their land except as it relates to our property at the embassy grounds. It’s the usual political nightmare. Reason for some distant resources.
4. ) Multiple MAJCOMs told to stay hands off. SPECOPS told to stand down multiple times.
5. ) The State Department was well aware of the hostility in the area and there are daily intelligence briefs. The info is forwarded up the chain to State Department. See #3.
6. ) Investigation did in fact show mistakes made the night of and leading up to. The Obama dream team got another hard pass on responsibility.
Those are some pretty heavy allegations to not have links behind them.
Hopefully links to the original text of the house or senate committee reports.
Anyhow most of that's not relevant to my actual point. There were 7 Congressional investigations into Benghazi.
the Republican party does not get to complain about Adam Schiff starting the first partisan investigation into Russian interference or unconstitutional emoluments or tax evasion. Maybe they get to complain after the 8th one. The first seven are fair play.
Wait, you attempted to compare this to Beruit and provided some opinion piece as your source. Now my response is irrelevenat? Benghazi had so many investigations because of the large amount of moving pieces and the outright negligence. Congress has numerous oversight committees. Yet they still didn't pin the tail on the donkey! Most of the detail I provided is FACT and well documented whether through committee reports, Joint Doctrine, OPLAN, OPORDs, COMPLANs, AFRICOM SITREPS, or AFRICOM Theater Analysis Reports. Heck, you can use Google maps to test distance if you'd like. Might even find some redacted reports if you look hard enough. A lot you will not see for at least 10 years, perhaps even 25.
Once again, you are comparing apples to bananas. Benghazi was not a Beruit and neither situation is comparable in scope and bias to Adam Schiff and the Dem party starting yet another Russian investigation. Did we forget the Special Council and some rediculous Russian broad scope investigation? Do we toss aside the fact emolument is already in court being looked at? Tax evasion? His taxes are reviewed before being sworn in and that certainly would have been identified in an audit.
Now tax payers must sit by while the Dems hire/pay two high power attorneys to rehash the last two years of obstructionism they already paid for? This is pure hatred and political terrorism at a historical level. Could you imagine groups of people surrounding you at work looking to sabotage your every move? This has come down to researching every law and statute to use against a man they dislike...guilty until proven innocent. It isn't logical.
Oddly enough, there is more hate for Pence so it amazes me Dems try so hard. In any case, after all this, he will still remain in office.
P.S. You sure like to bounce from topic to topic. I guess something will eventually stick to that wall your abusing!
(02-20-2019, 11:13 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-20-2019, 06:20 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Liberals are also going to be disappointed when it's disclosed that there is no "Russian collusion" between President Trump and Russia. This "investigation" was nothing more than a waste of my (our) tax payer dollars.
There is no doubt there was collusion, the only questions are if there was quid pro quo and if Trump was aware and complicit.
Collusion or interference?
Because I believe the "intelligence community" has said there was definite interference. But for whom and by whom was never made clear.
Collusion has not and in my opinion, will not, be proven in any state or form.
But.... carry on if you must.
About the topic or Benghazi... either one I guess.
This thread is a prime example of where those earned -1's come from.
(02-20-2019, 05:08 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]New Attorney General Barr Ending Mueller Investigation ‘By Next Week’
There’s a new Sheriff in town, and he isn’t wasting any time asserting his authority.
Liberals were stunned and furious Wednesday by reports that newly-confirmed Attorney General William Barr is prepared to announce an end to the Mueller investigation.
And the announcement could come as early as next week CNN reported.
http://us24news.com/new-attorney-general...0klwcYMb8s
This should really be no surprise to anyone. Mueller has said as much already himself. He's been disengaged for quite a while, and as those who have worked on it in different capacities have already confirmed... there was never any "there" there.
(02-20-2019, 11:13 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-20-2019, 06:20 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Liberals are also going to be disappointed when it's disclosed that there is no "Russian collusion" between President Trump and Russia. This "investigation" was nothing more than a waste of my (our) tax payer dollars.
There is no doubt there was collusion, the only questions are if there was quid pro quo and if Trump was aware and complicit.
TDS exhibit # 1248925653. Reality is here whenever you are emotionally ready to rejoin the sane and rational here in the real world.
(02-22-2019, 11:32 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2019, 01:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I put carefully considered subordinate clauses in most of my sentences.
You subtract them out, to make the sentences that remain false, and then accuse me of lies or ignorance.
I don't know if you're struggling to read, or if you have malice.
What are you talking about? I quoted your entire paragraph word for word.
Or were you responding to someone else?
I carefully explained what I meant about the time between when help could have arrived by air from Italy vs when it actually arrived by road from Tripoli. You just threw that out and focused on the word "waiting" with no clarification. Help was too far away. The bad decisions were made many nights prior.
So discussing political ideologies in a thread about a Supreme Court justice's political ideology is off-topic, but going on about Benghazi in a thread about the Mueller investigation isn't. Huh.
(02-25-2019, 10:33 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]So discussing political ideologies in a thread about a Supreme Court justice's political ideology is off-topic, but going on about Benghazi in a thread about the Mueller investigation isn't. Huh.
If a mod wants to kibosh it, I won't complain.