Treasonous John Kerry

Stevens was a Hillary planted cia asset running guns out of a destabilized Libya into the hands of "moderate" rebels in Syria. To send in support would have exposed more which was never going to happen

Your view ignores the realities I already covered. Before muddying the topic with your conspiracy theories, I suggest that you first deal with the known facts.
 
Your view ignores the realities I already covered. Before muddying the topic with your conspiracy theories, I suggest that you first deal with the known facts.
Those are as close to facts as you'll get in this case. Support would have been provided for a diplomatic mission

Obama admin should have been prosecuted for it
 
Do you really believe what you write? If you weren't defending Hillary and the Left's politics would you have the same opinion? Stevens was a US AMBASSADOR. We should have at a minimum evacuated him and his family, I get it that the "security detail" knew the risks but this thing spun up over several days so they had time to build a story and get him out.

My posts do not defend Hillary Clinton. If you were not so needy to attack me, you might be able to view facts as facts and see the events with more clarity.
 
Those are as close to facts as you'll get in this case

Obama admin should have been prosecuted for it

I see what you are doing here, reading and posting for the purpose of attacking people, not for the purpose of understanding policy.
 
I see what you are doing here, reading and posting for the purpose of attacking people, not for the purpose of understanding policy.
You've demonstrated no knowledge of policy so why would you care about mine?
 
Those are as close to facts as you'll get in this case. Support would have been provided for a diplomatic mission

Obama admin should have been prosecuted for it

With the threat level as high as it was a diplomatic mission would have been canceled.
 
You've demonstrated no knowledge of policy so why would you care about mine?

That is not true. You just ignored my discussion of the facts which determined the Libya policy because they do not further your emotion based, politically biased purpose, which is to attack people instead of understanding foreign policy. With you, politically biased personal attacks come first and determines your thinking. Political attacks and foreign policy are, or at least should be, two very different fields of endeavor. For you, they clearly are not different or separate.
 
That is not true. You just ignored my discussion of the facts which determined the Libya policy because they do not further your emotion based, politically biased purpose, which is to attack people instead of understanding foreign policy. With you, politically biased personal attacks come first and determines your thinking. Political attacks and foreign policy are, or at least should be, two very different fields of endeavor. For you, they clearly are not different or separate.
It's not emotional and you clearly don't understand my politics. I know that what was done to Libya and with what remained if the country was absolutely criminal. What was then done with the spoils to attack Syria backfired. Nothing good came from it unless you're a defense contractors (who profited handsomely off the useless foreign policy of that admin)
 
You're rambling. Additional security was requested. More than once. And it was denied. The people in the embassy knew they were in danger and asked for help. The State Department refused. They wanted to keep a low profile. It was a choice. The State Department went against their own Overseas Security Policy Board standards to keep a low profile. It cost the ambassador and other Americans their lives.

Flashing Red-HSGAC Special Report final.pdf (gpo.gov)

Lookit, we all know that additional security was requested. It was sent early on but the last requests were not granted. I already stated the reasons and my position on the matter. I also stated that you are inno position to cry foul after the fact when you and others so outraged did absolutely nothing to prevent that diplomatic mission being sent into a dangerous country where military support could not be approved. Or did you? What did you do, besides nothing to object to that diplomatic mission going into Lybia? Say it; you did nothing. All of those hyenas in Congress making political hay of the four deaths did nothing to prevent their deaths. They actually had a role to play, because Congressional committees reviewed the poliicy in open hearings and then funded the mission. When it went bad, Republicans did an act as if they had not known and approved the mission.
 
It's not emotional and you clearly don't understand my politics. I know that what was done to Libya and with what remained if the country was absolutely criminal. What was then done with the spoils to attack Syria backfired. Nothing good came from it unless you're a defense contractors (who profited handsomely off the useless foreign policy of that admin)

I clearly understand what you just admitted, that you are arguing politics. I've seen no inclination or ability from you to recognize and consider the determining elements of U.S. foreign policy in Libya.
 
Last edited:
I clearly understand what you just admitted, that you are arguing politics. I've seen no inclination or ability from you to consider the determining elements of U.S. foreign policy in Lybia.
Well, I know how to spell Libya

The US foreign policy was to completely destabilize the country and take advantage of that
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
Well, I know how to spell Libya

The US foreign policy was to completely destabilize the country and take advantage of that

Do you not understand that we are talking about Ambassador Stevens' diplomatic mission? Or do you think his mission was to destabilize and exploit the country? Is that what you think?
 
Do you not understand that we are talking about Ambassador Stevens' diplomatic mission? Or do you think his mission was to destabilize and exploit the country? Is that what you think?
He was there to move weapons. He was Cia
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
You've demonstrated no knowledge of policy so why would you care about mine?

How do you expect me to demonstrate my hours spent researching information on this subject, including C-Span broadcasts of hearings in Congress before the mission was sent? You want what, a signed and notarized affidavit? Why don't you tell us the sources of your information instead of doubting mine? If you think I demonstrate no knowledge of this subject, it is likely because you have too little of it to make and voice informed judgments of your own. You already admitted that I needed an understanding of your politics. Wrong. Your politics did not determine U.S. foreign policy in Libya.
 
I see I didn't get an answer...

An answer to what question? I gave you televised Congressional hearings on State Department policy toward Libya. Are you going to ignore that answer because it does not suit your politics and then accuse me of not answering? Your ignorance is your problem, not my problem.
 
Last edited:
An answer to what question? I gave you televised Congressional hearings on State Department policy toward Libya. Are you going to ignore that answer because it does not suit your politics and then accuse me of not answering? Your ignorance is your problem, not my problem.

Lol.

So, no links
 
Lookit, we all know that additional security was requested. It was sent early on but the last requests were not granted. I already stated the reasons and my position on the matter. I also stated that you are inno position to cry foul after the fact when you and others so outraged did absolutely nothing to prevent that diplomatic mission being sent into a dangerous country where military support could not be approved. Or did you? What did you do, besides nothing to object to that diplomatic mission going into Lybia? Say it; you did nothing. All of those hyenas in Congress making political hay of the four deaths did nothing to prevent their deaths. They actually had a role to play, because Congressional committees reviewed the poliicy in open hearings and then funded the mission. When it went bad, Republicans did an act as if they had not known and approved the mission.

You like to ramble on about nothing as if it is something. Benghazi was in chaos. There had been an assassination attempt on the British ambassador and another country's consulate, I think it was Tunisia's, had been attacked in the days and weeks leading up to the attack. Local authorities had warned that there was little they could do. Requests for additional security were made and denied. Hell, one of the people that was killed even saw someone dressed as a local police officer taking pictures of the embassy. They knew an attack was imminent and that they were sitting ducks, but the State Department refused to help.

You can keep ducking and dodging and rambling on, but it's a shame that those American lives were hung out to dry. It shouldn't have happened. A competent leader wouldn't have let it happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
You like to ramble on about nothing as if it is something. Benghazi was in chaos. There had been an assassination attempt on the British ambassador and another country's consulate, I think it was Tunisia's, had been attacked in the days and weeks leading up to the attack. Local authorities had warned that there was little they could do. Requests for additional security were made and denied. Hell, one of the people that was killed even saw someone dressed as a local police officer taking pictures of the embassy. They knew an attack was imminent and that they were sitting ducks, but the State Department refused to help.

You can keep ducking and dodging and rambling on, but it's a shame that those American lives were hung out to dry. It shouldn't have happened. A competent leader wouldn't have let it happen.

I think you are the one rambling without making any salient points, all the while ignoring the ones in my posts. If you know that a competent leader would not have let it happen, then please tell us what a competent leader would have done.
 
I think you are the one rambling without making any salient points, all the while ignoring the ones in my posts. If you know that a competent leader would not have let it happen, then please tell us what a competent leader would have done.
Either provided the reinforcements or pulled the ambassador and support staff out of there as tensions were clearly on the rise.
 

VN Store



Back
Top