BREAKING: “Select Committee” Benghazi Investigation is On

#26
#26
Grand Vol said:
The scam...

The fact there was reliable intelligence on the night of and even in the first couple of days after that this was terrorism and not protests in reaction to some video and that said information was suppressed is a scam.

The fact the Administration kept up the lie that this was in relation to a video for over a week and continued to downplay the terrorism angle from known Al Qaeda affiliates is a scam.

The fact that no military forces were sent in to help, even though they were a little over an hour away was a scam.

The fact we did little to nothing to get the Libyans to identify and track down these terrorists until far after the fact is a scam.

The fact that an Ambassador was traveling on the day of one of the greatest terrorist attacks in world history and in a country that's historically a hotbed for terrorist activity and support with only a token security detail is a scam.

The fact that increased security arrangements were denied to the Ambassador is a scam.

The fact a ranking flag officer in the military suddenly retired in the aftermath of this debacle raises eyebrows and screams of a scam.

And last but not least, the whole way this has been downplayed by the Administration, the way the President had a lackadaisical attitude towards the event because he was preparing for a fund raiser in Vegas, the continued lies about what happened and the fact new evidence is coming to light now that identifies people within the White House itself that helped downplay this just reeks of "scam."
Click to expand...

Again, wishing the same outrage was placed on other scams in the past. The fact we are still dealing with a scam in the form of Iraq leaves little in the minds of most Americans hearing the foot stomping on this. The fact we had sketchy evidence on that but sold the "slam dunk" line and invaded a sovereign nation, deposed, and killed the leader, failed at containing the violence, propped up a puppet government, and still to this day have those who made those decisions tell us the WMD's are still out there? I'm willing to bet most Americans will not jump on this bandwagon. Regardless of my own beliefs in this matter I am telling you this is a road that the GOP may not want to go down. but they will regardless and we will see how it plays out. Like I said, it will stir up their base and get people to the polls in 2014 but could ultimately backfire leading into 2016. And like I said, regardless of my personal stance on this particular incident, I really wish that this scrutiny on this topic was applied to previous presidents as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#27
#27
Grand Vol said:
And yeah, there was plenty of outrage back then too.
Click to expand...

Cindy Sheehan? Code Pink? Not sure where the outrage was on the Right. Personally, I was kicked out of a few Republican and conservative organizations because I said it was stupid to even touch Iraq. I was called a liberal, pansy, and even traitor and a disgrace for ever being in the Army for simply saying it would be stupid to go into Iraq. There is a weasel on radio and television before he got big that called my patriotism out almost resulting in him seeing what good ol' American black eyed peas, collards, and cornbread fed fist could do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#28
#28
CSpindizzy said:
Again, wishing the same outrage was placed on other scams in the past. The fact we are still dealing with a scam in the form of Iraq leaves little in the minds of most Americans hearing the foot stomping on this. The fact we had sketchy evidence on that but sold the "slam dunk" line and invaded a sovereign nation, deposed, and killed the leader, failed at containing the violence, propped up a puppet government, and still to this day have those who made those decisions tell us the WMD's are still out there? I'm willing to bet most Americans will not jump on this bandwagon. Regardless of my own beliefs in this matter I am telling you this is a road that the GOP may not want to go down. but they will regardless and we will see how it plays out. Like I said, it will stir up their base and get people to the polls in 2014 but could ultimately backfire leading into 2016. And like I said, regardless of my personal stance on this particular incident, I really wish that this scrutiny on this topic was applied to previous presidents as well.
Click to expand...

We've discussed OIF in detail in other posts and I outlined some of it in an above post. I don't disagree that the WMD line probably wasn't the best avenue to take. And I won't disagree that the conduct in the aftermath left a lot to be desired. We have a military that's great at immolating other nations, killing people and breaking their toys. However, the military was not prepared to go in and win the peace like we have in past conflicts. Once unleashed in 2007 during the surge, we again won the battles, but as seen in recent memory still haven't won the peace.

Different topic, different threads. But again, we started something in 1991 that we should have finished, Saudis, the UN and everyone else be damned. We spent the next twelve years draining ourselves and breaking our military enforcing UN Sanctions that wouldn't have/shouldn't have been in place had we taken him out of power in 91 when we had the entire world backing the actions.
 
#29
#29
CSpindizzy said:
Cindy Sheehan? Code Pink? Not sure where the outrage was on the Right. Personally, I was kicked out of a few Republican and conservative organizations because I said it was stupid to even touch Iraq. I was called a liberal, pansy, and even traitor and a disgrace for ever being in the Army for simply saying it would be stupid to go into Iraq. There is a weasel on radio and television before he got big that called my patriotism out almost resulting in him seeing what good ol' American black eyed peas, collards, and cornbread fed fist could do.
Click to expand...

You have my curiosity piqued.
 
#30
#30
Grand Vol said:
We've discussed OIF in detail in other posts and I outlined some of it in an above post. I don't disagree that the WMD line probably wasn't the best avenue to take. And I won't disagree that the conduct in the aftermath left a lot to be desired. We have a military that's great at immolating other nations, killing people and breaking their toys. However, the military was not prepared to go in and win the peace like we have in past conflicts. Once unleashed in 2007 during the surge, we again won the battles, but as seen in recent memory still haven't won the peace.

Different topic, different threads. But again, we started something in 1991 that we should have finished, Saudis, the UN and everyone else be damned. We spent the next twelve years draining ourselves and breaking our military enforcing UN Sanctions that wouldn't have/shouldn't have been in place had we taken him out of power in 91 when we had the entire world backing the actions.
Click to expand...

Yes, different topic. But similar in principle. I see all of those items as much a scam and even far greater consequences and implications. All honor to the four who died in Libya but seeing the costs still being tallied in Iraq over shoddy intel, planning, and responses (strategy and explanations) I see a far greater outrage there. The same ones stomping and screaming here on Benghazi (those in Congress mind you) did everything but question what happened in Iraq. If anything they were the ones questioning Democrats' patriotism etc. on the matter. So please forgive me if I am not on the Issa bandwagon demanding answers and justice when he was busy waving the flag leading the charge just a few years ago on something far more costly in American lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#32
#32
Grand Vol said:
You have my curiosity piqued.
Click to expand...

A certain radio personality based here in Atlanta getting his radio start in Macon and now on WSB. Back then he was no different than you and I but on a GA Republican Yahoo discussion group toting the company line on everything even with a certain milquetoast Senator thankfully retiring this year....

not bitter or anything... :)
 
#33
#33
Hopefully they'll find out also who didn't try to send help when the contractor called for backup.
 
#34
#34
CSpindizzy said:
Cindy Sheehan? Code Pink? Not sure where the outrage was on the Right.
Click to expand...

And an addendum...

There was plenty of opportunity back in the aftermath of the invasion to call for select committees and investigations for the matters of Iraq. Why didn't the DNC do so? They very easily could have in 2006 after they took back the House and Senate. The Democrats very well could have voted against funding the Surge in 2007 as a means of bringing Bush to the bargaining table.

Neither of which was done.

Sure there was no outrage on the Right, just like there is little to no outrage from the left over Libya, the IRS, the EPA, Fast and Furious...I could go on, but you get the point.
 
#35
#35
Grand Vol said:
And an addendum...

There was plenty of opportunity back in the aftermath of the invasion to call for select committees and investigations for the matters of Iraq. Why didn't the DNC do so? They very easily could have in 2006 after they took back the House and Senate. The Democrats very well could have voted against funding the Surge in 2007 as a means of bringing Bush to the bargaining table.

Neither of which was done.

Sure there was no outrage on the Right, just like there is little to no outrage from the left over Libya, the IRS, the EPA, Fast and Furious...I could go on, but you get the point.
Click to expand...

No one did, you are right. Part of it was due to the mentality of the time. No one questioned anything back then because of the patriotic fervor. Dems were scared to death to say anything in fear of elections. Some stepped up and did - usually only the ones in safe districts or already written off as nuts.

And you're right. No current outage on the left on those topics....hypocrites and liars the lot of them.
 
#36
#36
CSpindizzy said:
Yes, different topic. But similar in principle. I see all of those items as much a scam and even far greater consequences and implications. All honor to the four who died in Libya but seeing the costs still being tallied in Iraq over shoddy intel, planning, and responses (strategy and explanations) I see a far greater outrage there. The same ones stomping and screaming here on Benghazi (those in Congress mind you) did everything but question what happened in Iraq. If anything they were the ones questioning Democrats' patriotism etc. on the matter. So please forgive me if I am not on the Issa bandwagon demanding answers and justice when he was busy waving the flag leading the charge just a few years ago on something far more costly in American lives.
Click to expand...

The overall problem of OIF wasn't the winning on the battlefield, but winning the aftermath.

When KBR and others started rolling in to start the rebuilding process (in before LG starts screaming about Cheney) they omitted the very large fact that when they pull in third country nationals to do the work, they put Iraqis out of a job. If said corporations were going into the villages and asking the chiefs what they wanted and putting their guys to work, you would not have seen such a large scale insurgency in the aftermath. Sure, there would have been some fighting, but when you put a man to work, give him a steady paycheck and the meaningful responsibilities of helping rebuild his nation, he's a lot less apt to fight you in the long run.

And that's where we failed. We forgot the lessons of WWII where the Germans, Italians and Japanese rebuilt their nations. Sure they were occupied, but the people themselves rebuilt it from the destruction it once was. Americans didn't bring in labor to do it for them, they did it themselves. And that's how you avoid an insurgency.
 
#37
#37
volholio said:
Benghazi is the biggest waste of a scam of an investigation since the last scam the IRS scam waste of time of an investigation. Now if you really want an investigation, let's understand what happened with the lies of Iraqi invasion. I bet you all were hootin and hollerin for that scam.
Click to expand...

I was, but my voice couldn't be heard over the sound of the gun fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#38
#38
Grand Vol said:
The overall problem of OIF wasn't the winning on the battlefield, but winning the aftermath.

When KBR and others started rolling in to start the rebuilding process (in before LG starts screaming about Cheney) they omitted the very large fact that when they pull in third country nationals to do the work, they put Iraqis out of a job. If said corporations were going into the villages and asking the chiefs what they wanted and putting their guys to work, you would not have seen such a large scale insurgency in the aftermath. Sure, there would have been some fighting, but when you put a man to work, give him a steady paycheck and the meaningful responsibilities of helping rebuild his nation, he's a lot less apt to fight you in the long run.

And that's where we failed. We forgot the lessons of WWII where the Germans, Italians and Japanese rebuilt their nations. Sure they were occupied, but the people themselves rebuilt it from the destruction it once was. Americans didn't bring in labor to do it for them, they did it themselves. And that's how you avoid an insurgency.
Click to expand...

Yep, history is important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#39
#39
CSpindizzy said:
No one did, you are right. Part of it was due to the mentality of the time. No one questioned anything back then because of the patriotic fervor. Dems were scared to death to say anything in fear of elections. Some stepped up and did - usually only the ones in safe districts or already written off as nuts.

And you're right. No current outage on the left on those topics....hypocrites and liars the lot of them.
Click to expand...

I think the patriotic fervor was pretty much gone by the time the 2004 elections came around. The argument could be made that it was gone by the time OIF started.

But the second part of the equation should read non-partisan. It's not a left or right thing, just a politics thing.
 
#41
#41
Grand Vol said:
The overall problem of OIF wasn't the winning on the battlefield, but winning the aftermath.

When KBR and others started rolling in to start the rebuilding process (in before LG starts screaming about Cheney) they omitted the very large fact that when they pull in third country nationals to do the work, they put Iraqis out of a job. If said corporations were going into the villages and asking the chiefs what they wanted and putting their guys to work, you would not have seen such a large scale insurgency in the aftermath. Sure, there would have been some fighting, but when you put a man to work, give him a steady paycheck and the meaningful responsibilities of helping rebuild his nation, he's a lot less apt to fight you in the long run.

And that's where we failed. We forgot the lessons of WWII where the Germans, Italians and Japanese rebuilt their nations. Sure they were occupied, but the people themselves rebuilt it from the destruction it once was. Americans didn't bring in labor to do it for them, they did it themselves. And that's how you avoid an insurgency.
Click to expand...

I go further back to the starting point. Should not have even occurred. Keep the flights overhead monitoring him. A tight grip on a guy who kept it together was much better than what we chose. If we are discussing learning lessons of history, let us look at attempts to go into a country and redefine their leadership - especially Third World ones with various ethnic and political groups. We knew going after Osama would be problematic and take time. And we needed a quick whipping boy. Saddam was sitting on previous outstanding issues and was set for deposing. We recklessly took that path and are still paying for it.

We keep continuing this variation of Bush Doctrine with deposing these guys and get deeper in trouble the further we go....Mummar was the same situation. And now with Assad as well.
 
#42
#42
CSpindizzy said:
I go further back to the starting point. Should not have even occurred. Keep the flights overhead monitoring him. A tight grip on a guy who kept it together was much better than what we chose. If we are discussing learning lessons of history, let us look at attempts to go into a country and redefine their leadership - especially Third World ones with various ethnic and political groups. We knew going after Osama would be problematic and take time. And we needed a quick whipping boy. Saddam was sitting on previous outstanding issues and was set for deposing. We recklessly took that path and are still paying for it.

We keep continuing this variation of Bush Doctrine with deposing these guys and get deeper in trouble the further we go....Mummar was the same situation. And now with Assad as well.
Click to expand...

And I can go further back and say we shouldn't have let the UN dictate our policy in 1990 and gotten it over then. The continual deployments to the Gulf region was straining and hurting our military in the 90s. I know, I spent some significant time over there prior to 9/11.

But we had no business in Libya. And have no business in Syria. I think Afghanistan was overplayed as they have to be ready to accept democracy and join the standards of humanity in the 21st century before they can move on. A far lower level of involvement I support (spec-ops, airstrikes, military assistance) in Afghanistan. And again, Iraq should have been done in 1991.

Problem we had was not allowing the Kurdish State to remove itself and form a new nation as well as a Shi'a State in the South. I think you would have had far less troubles had the people in Iraq been allowed to determine their national destiny rather than trying to keep three separate and wildly opposite cultures and religions under the same roof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
Grand Vol said:
But we had no business in Libya. And have no business in Syria. I think Afghanistan was overplayed as they have to be ready to accept democracy and join the standards of humanity in the 21st century before they can move on. A far lower level of involvement I support (spec-ops, airstrikes, military assistance) in Afghanistan. And again, Iraq should have been done in 1991.

Problem we had was not allowing the Kurdish State to remove itself and form a new nation as well as a Shi'a State in the South. I think you would have had far less troubles had the people in Iraq been allowed to determine their national destiny rather than trying to keep three separate and wildly opposite cultures and religions under the same roof.
Click to expand...

Agreed. no business in those nations. Much easier dealing with the devil we know IF we have to deal with anyone rather than dealing with the devil we do not know.

As for the Kurds, Turkey would have went nuts over that. They've dealt with the Kurdish issue for a while and us allowing a state would have opened the door for their troubles. They adamantly say no to that.
 
#44
#44
CSpindizzy said:
As for the Kurds, Turkey would have went nuts over that. They've dealt with the Kurdish issue for a while and us allowing a state would have opened the door for their troubles. They adamantly say no to that.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. And Iran as well.

But having been in Turkey, I have to say I would care less what their opinion would be personally. I have never seen such an arrogant people in my life with what very well would be a third world country with limited resources if they didn't happen to be in a strategic part of the world. And the fact they play that tidbit up any time they can is just aggravating.

Not fond of Turks.
 
#46
#46
Grand Vol said:
Oh, I agree. And Iran as well.

But having been in Turkey, I have to say I would care less what their opinion would be personally. I have never seen such an arrogant people in my life with what very well would be a third world country with limited resources if they didn't happen to be in a strategic part of the world. And the fact they play that tidbit up any time they can is just aggravating.

Not fond of Turks.
Click to expand...

My SIL is 1/2 turk and she is just dumb. Her Dad is just like you describe but her uncles are not too bad, pretty wild partiers, and Muslim too.
 
#48
#48
This whole thing is a waste of time. We already found out that it was a quick reaction because of a video. Just move along.

-LG
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#49
#49
Grand Vol said:
Oh, I agree. And Iran as well.

But having been in Turkey, I have to say I would care less what their opinion would be personally. I have never seen such an arrogant people in my life with what very well would be a third world country with limited resources if they didn't happen to be in a strategic part of the world. And the fact they play that tidbit up any time they can is just aggravating.

Not fond of Turks.
Click to expand...

Them and some areas of the former Yugoslavia. Some Bosnians and Serbs I've run across are about as bad. Yes, the history and sites are great in Turkey but only after removing everyone in site first.
 
#50
#50
TVOLS said:
Hopefully they'll find out also who didn't try to send help when the contractor called for backup.
Click to expand...

Obama personally called Clinton. They laughed at the impending attack and ordered all military to stand down. They then bowed to various foreign dignitaries, prayed to Mecca, and read to each other from Karl Marx on the phone.

The next day they picked out guns to give to Mexicans, then went to the IRS headquarters and picked out tea party groups to audit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top