If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Benghazi consulate had no Marine protection - but c'mon, it's Libya. Who could have predicted things might go pear-shaped in a place like that?   (politico.com) divider line 307
    More: Followup, Benghazi, Libya, Ambassadors of the United States, protections, u.s. consulate, surveillance aircraft, Libyan rebels, Defense Secretary Robert Gates  
•       •       •

5747 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2012 at 8:02 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



307 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-13 03:04:06 PM

Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.


It is beyond dumb. It is (imho) negligent especially considering the situation in that country and in fact that whole region in the last two years. This is hardly what one might call...a surprise. There is probably a room full of people at the CIA face-desking becuase they told him so or something.
 
2012-09-13 03:06:41 PM

LesserEvil: Look, all you need to understand (are you listening, press?) is that this was a coordinated attack by Al Qaida in retribution for the killing of one of their leaders in late August. The Libyan ambassador was targeted where he was because of the lack of security.

Countries that host embassies also have a repsonsibility to keep mobs clear from the surrounding areas through crowd control. It's possible, in this case, that not only did that not happen, but government personnel were actually involved in the attack.

It's getting a bit sickening that the red herring of "that bad bad film thoise racists are making" is continually being floated as the reason for these attacks. These were not "protestors" - they were attackers.

This was a terrorist attack.

It's very likely the attack on the Egyptian embassy was part of that. The Yemeni embassy attacks might also be a part of that (or it's just momentum).

Who is to blame? How about we blame radical Islamists for being what they are? No more reason is needed beyond that. There are several ways to stop these attacks, but appeasement isn't a practical choice.


Yeah, I agree.

The stupid "movie" was used as an excuse, but that thing has been around on the intertubes since July, apparently.

Also (from a WSJ story I read today), the locals said the "protestors" had guns and RPGs. They did not go to the building to protest, they were there to attack it. And it started at about 8 PM local time (so kinda under cover of darkness).

This shiat didn't have anything to do with some stupid anti-Islam video. Maybe the consulate personnel didn't know that at the time, but it seems pretty clear now.
 
2012-09-13 03:07:51 PM

Gumaraid: rufus-t-firefly: Gumaraid: HotWingConspiracy: Gumaraid: Welcome to Obama's brave new world where we all sing kumbaya while our enemies burn the house down around us.

Tomorrow you'll be calling him a monster again for having a kill list.

No. I've already said that. He is a murderer for authorizing the execution of Americans without trial by jury. Unlike you I don't let my politics interfere with my sense of right and wrong.

So, he's doing too much while he does nothing.

Cognitive dissonance isn't treated as a preexisting condition anymore. Please get help.

Ahhh the liberal mind. It never ceases to amaze in it's ability to feign intelligence when to all who see it is but a monkey fapping to the crowd at a zoo. So, let me get this straight; it's ok by you if foreign countries allow the murder of our citizens without fear of reprisal and it's ok if the President targets Americans for murder by missile without due process as long as he is a liberal and bites his upper lip when he pulls the trigger? And you see both of these scenarios as somehow opposites of each other? Unfortunately there is no help for you.


Libya "allowed" the deaths? You mean by having 10 security people fight to the death to protect them? Here's the problem: your thinking is sloppy. It happened in a foreign country so a "foreign country allowed it." Just like when Belgian tourists are carjacked and shot in Florida the "United States allowed it."
 
2012-09-13 03:12:18 PM

Kazrath: If we could get rid of the major drain on our society (The republicans) we would be damn near a utopia.


There's already a place like that.

It's called Detroit.
 
2012-09-13 03:12:59 PM

XveryYpettyZ: Gumaraid: rufus-t-firefly: Gumaraid: HotWingConspiracy: Gumaraid: Welcome to Obama's brave new world where we all sing kumbaya while our enemies burn the house down around us.

Tomorrow you'll be calling him a monster again for having a kill list.

No. I've already said that. He is a murderer for authorizing the execution of Americans without trial by jury. Unlike you I don't let my politics interfere with my sense of right and wrong.

So, he's doing too much while he does nothing.

Cognitive dissonance isn't treated as a preexisting condition anymore. Please get help.

Ahhh the liberal mind. It never ceases to amaze in it's ability to feign intelligence when to all who see it is but a monkey fapping to the crowd at a zoo. So, let me get this straight; it's ok by you if foreign countries allow the murder of our citizens without fear of reprisal and it's ok if the President targets Americans for murder by missile without due process as long as he is a liberal and bites his upper lip when he pulls the trigger? And you see both of these scenarios as somehow opposites of each other? Unfortunately there is no help for you.

Libya "allowed" the deaths? You mean by having 10 security people fight to the death to protect them? Here's the problem: your thinking is sloppy. It happened in a foreign country so a "foreign country allowed it." Just like when Belgian tourists are carjacked and shot in Florida the "United States allowed it."


The US pulls out all the stops to keep it from happening, and kicks peoples' asses when it does. When was the last time a foreign diplomat was killed in the US? But here, the blame lies with the State Department. Hillary fat mouth should be doing some explaining, not apologizing on TV.
 
2012-09-13 03:13:27 PM

Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.


You apparently suffer from cognitive or literacy malfunction. If you read up the thread, there are a number of embassies protected only by host-government forces and not with marines.

Also, I'm sure everyone who gets assigned to one of these embassies is warned about the risks of unstable regions...
 
2012-09-13 03:14:30 PM

Gulper Eel: Kazrath: If we could get rid of the major drain on our society (The republicans) we would be damn near a utopia.

There's already a place like that.

It's called Detroit.


It scares me that people like Kazrath exist.
 
2012-09-13 03:15:17 PM
The galloping stupidity in this thread is headshake-inducing, even for Fark.

Not really surprised, just sayin'.
 
2012-09-13 03:16:17 PM

Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.

You apparently suffer from cognitive or literacy malfunction. If you read up the thread, there are a number of embassies protected only by host-government forces and not with marines.

Also, I'm sure everyone who gets assigned to one of these embassies is warned about the risks of unstable regions...


That is your argument? So an embassy in Libya, after all this, should only be protected by a few local goons because the one in Switzerland is?
 
2012-09-13 03:18:31 PM

LesserEvil: gerbilpox: LesserEvil: We'll never know because Carter's foreign policy was crap. He never understood what he was up against, and constantly erred in the worst possible ways.

Ever heard of the Camp David Accords? Maybe the biggest advance toward Middle East peace evar? Nobel Peace Prize to participants?


/just askin'

Carter got a peace prize? Oh, that's right, he didn't.


He got one (though technically it was later).

He aped built on the success Kissinger had and got two leaders who were reasonable and rational to the table. This wasn't bad, but let's not give Carter all the credit here.

FTFY

My reference was specifically to how the "revolution" was handled, or rather, mishandled.

A others stated, the embassy should have been evacuated when the Shah left. Instead, the administration took too many half-measures until it was too late.

The biggest problem was miscalculating the situation on the ground - in a number of ways - including being 'surprised' by the Shah's departure; hardly surprising considering the lack of actual support the US was giving his regime. Diplomatic effort could have been spent to reassure the Shah of support, perhaps a coalition of nations backing him explicitly, while at the same time, leaning on him to make compromises with the more moderate of his opponents (who ended up dead anyway when the Islamists took over, but might have swung the popular revolt).

A negotiated transfer of power was also an option - again, until the Shah left, the military backed his regime. The collapse was not inevitable until he fled the country. A more orderly transition to a western-style democracy might have been possible.

None of that was even attempted. The US stood by and let everything play out... and we can see the result with hindsight's 20/20 clarity.


The Shah was a ruthless dictator, and his SAVAK tortured and murdered people. By the time he left, as much as 10% of the population was demonstrating against him. It's naive to think either he or the people would have accepted him conceding only some power, or doing it slowly. People were already angry about his relationship with the U.S.; outside support was not going to save him. He did make concessions to more moderate opponents; he conceded the whole gov't to Bakhtiar, who called for free elections. It didn't stop the Islamists from taking power.

We helped him overthrow a democratic gov't to take power, and like many dictators (in Latin America, for example), we supported him despite his crimes because it served our Cold War purposes -- to the detriment and anger of his people. Carter got left with the mess others created.

His main mistake was to let the Shah into the country for medical treatment, which outraged Iran and sparked the embassy takeover. That move, by the way, was strongly urged by Kissinger.
 
2012-09-13 03:21:18 PM
Send in the drones!
 
2012-09-13 03:23:40 PM

Thunderpipes: That is your argument? So an embassy in Libya, after all this, should only be protected by a few local goons because the one in Switzerland is?


It wasn't an embassy. It was a consulate. Like a branch office.

PS...After the US pretty much drove off the Gadaffi forces from Benghazi, the people there have been very much friendly to Americans.

This was a well planned effort by a handful of thugs taking advantage of the translated release of a Christian film maker's poorly made, over the top, intended to be insulting to Muslims, movie trailer on the very day the protests began...(coincidence? I think not)

Use your brain man....
 
2012-09-13 03:40:06 PM

Thunderpipes: Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.

You apparently suffer from cognitive or literacy malfunction. If you read up the thread, there are a number of embassies protected only by host-government forces and not with marines.

Also, I'm sure everyone who gets assigned to one of these embassies is warned about the risks of unstable regions...

That is your argument? So an embassy in Libya, after all this, should only be protected by a few local goons because the one in Switzerland is?


What argument? It's a statement of fact, given by people who have ACTUALLY BEEN IN THE MSG PROGRAM. There is no argument there. There is only "This is how it is."

And, then there's what X-boxershorts had to say about the fact that this was a pre-planned attack...

Now, you could argue the fact that the CIA didn't pick up on the threat and warn the WH, etc. but even the Libyan gov't warned the ambassador that the region was unstable and unsafe.

What more do you want? How is the US Gov't liable for anything? The ambassador and the others knew the risks going in, and there was no way, short of having had foreknowledge of the attacks, to have prevented this.

Lastly, I'd point out that even if the Marines HAD been there, their jobs is to destroy sensitive data and equipment and get people into safe rooms, not protect or act as bodyguards, so what would they have done?
 
2012-09-13 03:46:21 PM

Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.

You apparently suffer from cognitive or literacy malfunction. If you read up the thread, there are a number of embassies protected only by host-government forces and not with marines.

Also, I'm sure everyone who gets assigned to one of these embassies is warned about the risks of unstable regions...

That is your argument? So an embassy in Libya, after all this, should only be protected by a few local goons because the one in Switzerland is?

What argument? It's a statement of fact, given by people who have ACTUALLY BEEN IN THE MSG PROGRAM. There is no argument there. There is only "This is how it is."

And, then there's what X-boxershorts had to say about the fact that this was a pre-planned attack...

Now, you could argue the fact that the CIA didn't pick up on the threat and warn the WH, etc. but even the Libyan gov't warned the ambassador that the region was unstable and unsafe.

What more do you want? How is the US Gov't liable for anything? The ambassador and the others knew the risks going in, and there was no way, short of having had foreknowledge of the attacks, to have prevented this.

Lastly, I'd point out that even if the Marines HAD been there, their jobs is to destroy sensitive data and equipment and get people into safe rooms, not protect or act as bodyguards, so what would they have done?


Oh, okay Jason Bourne. The Marines would have stepped aside and let the diplomats be killed. Gotcha. There is dumb, and then bad dumb.
 
2012-09-13 03:47:55 PM

Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: Kit Fister: Thunderpipes: BojanglesPaladin: Thunderpipes: Hope the family sues the US government.

Why would you hope that?

I'm interested to know what you think that would accomplish specifically, and why you think that is the most appropriate action.

Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed. I am pissed now. Guy was a World of Tanks player too, and I played against him. Video gamer, gunned down in cold blood. Sad.

Seriously, what were people thinking, 4 Libyan security guards? Really? That is just dumb.

You apparently suffer from cognitive or literacy malfunction. If you read up the thread, there are a number of embassies protected only by host-government forces and not with marines.

Also, I'm sure everyone who gets assigned to one of these embassies is warned about the risks of unstable regions...

That is your argument? So an embassy in Libya, after all this, should only be protected by a few local goons because the one in Switzerland is?

What argument? It's a statement of fact, given by people who have ACTUALLY BEEN IN THE MSG PROGRAM. There is no argument there. There is only "This is how it is."

And, then there's what X-boxershorts had to say about the fact that this was a pre-planned attack...

Now, you could argue the fact that the CIA didn't pick up on the threat and warn the WH, etc. but even the Libyan gov't warned the ambassador that the region was unstable and unsafe.

What more do you want? How is the US Gov't liable for anything? The ambassador and the others knew the risks going in, and there was no way, short of having had foreknowledge of the attacks, to have prevented this.

Lastly, I'd point out that even if the Marines HAD been there, their jobs is to destroy sensitive data and equipment and get people into safe rooms, not protect or act as bodyguards, so what would they have done?


Dude, you're wasting your time. It doesn't recognize logic or reason.
 
2012-09-13 03:57:07 PM
Here you go: What Happened in Benghazi Was a Battle

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/libya-fast-team/
 
2012-09-13 03:58:28 PM

gerbilpox: His main mistake was to let the Shah into the country for medical treatment, which outraged Iran and sparked the embassy takeover. That move, by the way, was strongly urged by Kissinger.


Kissinger. A JEW.

/I KEED! I KEED!
 
2012-09-13 04:01:04 PM

Lunaville: PunGent: LesserEvil: Look, all you need to understand (are you listening, press?) is that this was a coordinated attack by Al Qaida in retribution for the killing of one of their leaders in late August. The Libyan ambassador was targeted where he was because of the lack of security.

Countries that host embassies also have a repsonsibility to keep mobs clear from the surrounding areas through crowd control. It's possible, in this case, that not only did that not happen, but government personnel were actually involved in the attack.

It's getting a bit sickening that the red herring of "that bad bad film thoise racists are making" is continually being floated as the reason for these attacks. These were not "protestors" - they were attackers.

This was a terrorist attack.

It's very likely the attack on the Egyptian embassy was part of that. The Yemeni embassy attacks might also be a part of that (or it's just momentum).

Who is to blame? How about we blame radical Islamists for being what they are? No more reason is needed beyond that. There are several ways to stop these attacks, but appeasement isn't a practical choice.

So you're in favor of no longer giving Muslim countries like Pakistan and Egypt billions of dollars, like Democratic AND Republican presidents have been doing for decades?

Just curious what your proposal actually is...it's easy to say "no more appeasement", but much harder to actually come up with a practical alternative.

Personally, I say cut off all the aid. Screw 'em.

I somewhat disagree. I firmly believe we should end all military aid to all nations. Humanitarian aid, however should be continued and, possibly, increased.


My problem with humanitarian aid is that paying for someone's butter lets them buy more guns.

I'd limit it to disease monitoring and prevention.
 
2012-09-13 04:05:34 PM

LesserEvil: PunGent: LesserEvil: Look, all you need to understand (are you listening, press?) is that this was a coordinated attack by Al Qaida in retribution for the killing of one of their leaders in late August. The Libyan ambassador was targeted where he was because of the lack of security.

Countries that host embassies also have a repsonsibility to keep mobs clear from the surrounding areas through crowd control. It's possible, in this case, that not only did that not happen, but government personnel were actually involved in the attack.

It's getting a bit sickening that the red herring of "that bad bad film thoise racists are making" is continually being floated as the reason for these attacks. These were not "protestors" - they were attackers.

This was a terrorist attack.

It's very likely the attack on the Egyptian embassy was part of that. The Yemeni embassy attacks might also be a part of that (or it's just momentum).

Who is to blame? How about we blame radical Islamists for being what they are? No more reason is needed beyond that. There are several ways to stop these attacks, but appeasement isn't a practical choice.

So you're in favor of no longer giving Muslim countries like Pakistan and Egypt billions of dollars, like Democratic AND Republican presidents have been doing for decades?

Just curious what your proposal actually is...it's easy to say "no more appeasement", but much harder to actually come up with a practical alternative.

Personally, I say cut off all the aid. Screw 'em.

I hate that we pay off governments (which is basically what aid is), and there is definitely a failure of their obligations here. Cutting off aid is one step... I'm not a fan of the idiot in the Egyptian embassy who has continually posted the nonsense about the film, either...


Yes, and invading Iraq was supposed to herald a blossoming of democracy over there.

Respect for us over there has been eroding since the 50s, when we took out Iran's democratic government. Remember the Marine barracks bombing?

This is, sadly, a GOOD day for the Middle East in comparison.

There's nothing for us over there; it's a blood-soaked sandbox full of angry children.

Let 'em kill each other, buy the oil from the winners.
 
2012-09-13 04:12:58 PM

1nsanilicious: tereklusec: WeDemocrats sent dignitaries THEN security personnel instead of the other way around?

WeDemocrats really are the overconfident assholes the rest of the countries accuse us of being.

FTFY


So, you're saying Republicans are fraidy-cat pussies.
 
2012-09-13 04:14:05 PM

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Here you go: What Happened in Benghazi Was a Battle

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/libya-fast-team/


So basically it breaks down as expected.

1. Libya lacked enough politically reliable troops to provide external security (note the reports of a sympathetic militia being needed to help push the attackers back).
2. DSS had a security team there, likely some mixture of private military contractors and locals that were hired.
3. The whole compound was ad hoc, not that shocking given the state of post civil war Libya.

Given the known flaws (weak local forces, ad hoc building) odds are there wasn't anything top secret in there. I bet someone did a survey of that place months ago and said "No way do we put anything classified in here". Hence the lack of MSGs, no classified things for them to protect/monitor. Odds are the private military contractors present included some retired military personnel who could supervise the locals as well as a MSG could. The ambassador though appears to have had strong ties with at least some of the locals which likely explains why he was operating out of there.

So at the end of the day, the whole Marine protection thing just shows a lack of understanding on how embassy security works. DSS runs embassy security and does so in a basically three pronged manner.

1. MSGs inside the compounds who have clearances to deal with the classified things. Also a few MSGs possibly as liaison to local security.
2. DSS employees and PMCs "on the walls"/screening visitors, etc.
3. Getting the host government to keep local security out front (be it a couple cops or a full on paramilitary unit).

There was likely no need for #1 due to the lack of classified stuff stored there. #3 was a problem due to the weakness of the central government. The proper thing to debate was if DSS had enough hired guns there for protection of the staff. Given there was a four hour gun battle with a militia that likely had combat experience (from the civil war) and the defenders lacked much in the way of ballistics protection and only a few Americans were KIA, it honestly does seem the DSS folks did a decent enough job. Of course they'll get second guessed now for the rest of the year.

So lets see the memos. Was the Ambassador asking for more hired guns? Was he begging for funds for a real embassy? Or was he saying "You know what, for a war torn city, security is actually pretty good.".
 
2012-09-13 04:33:16 PM

PunGent: Yes, and invading Iraq was supposed to herald a blossoming of democracy over there.

Respect for us over there has been eroding since the 50s, when we took out Iran's democratic government. Remember the Marine barracks bombing?

This is, sadly, a GOOD day for the Middle East in comparison.

There's nothing for us over there; it's a blood-soaked sandbox full of angry children.

Let 'em kill each other, buy the oil from the winners.




It's always about the oil too! When we overthrew Mossadegh in '53, it was for the oil (He threatened to nationalize Iran's oil industry...Oh oh! Less profit!) When I was in the Persian Gulf on USS Lawrence in 83 it was all about oil. It was the height if the Iran-Iraq war and we were escorting oil tankers from port to the Straits of Hormuz. When we kicked Saddam out of Kuwait in 1990, it's because that's where the Straits of Hormuz is an he could negatively impact the flow of 50% of the world's oil!

We should forsake oil from the ground and start making our own.

HEMP SEED OIL FTW!!!!!!
 
2012-09-13 04:40:37 PM

Sliding Carp: OldManDownDRoad: Heh. There's at least one person here posting from Kabul - although from AUAF, not the diplomatic compound.

This has been a very interesting thread for me. There's a very distinct dichotomy between the ITG jibberjabber and the actual explanations from experience. That kind of thing isn't usually as recognizable on the popular threads.


Well, that's the problem with Fark lately - all these adults joining up.

However, if you need a dose of simplistic solutions, ad hominem attacks, and general name-calling, there's always the politics tab.
 
2012-09-13 04:52:05 PM
Meh, they don't need marines and the marines don't need bullets. Harsh words should suffice. Welcome to ObamaBizzaroWorld.

www.top10films.co.uk
 
2012-09-13 05:02:34 PM

xtragrind: Are morons like you still calling them protestors? So far we know that they had heavy machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and also launched a coordinated mortar attack.


It's pretty simple really, there were protestors, and then there were the Islamist terrorists with the machine guns and rockets. As always if you follow the money it leads from the Islamists to Saudi Arabia.
 
2012-09-13 05:07:09 PM

gibbon1: As always if you follow the money it leads from the Islamists to Saudi Arabia.


Not always. Sometimes the money originates right here in America...Link
 
2012-09-13 05:15:47 PM
I'm obviously late to this, but my vote WILL hinge on how well Obama handles this situation.
 
2012-09-13 05:16:41 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Meh, they don't need marines and the marines don't need bullets. Harsh words should suffice. Welcome to ObamaBizzaroWorld.

[www.top10films.co.uk image 580x359]


I think you mean harsh language.
 
2012-09-13 05:41:03 PM

pkellmey: tereklusec: AverageAmericanGuy: OldManDownDRoad: AverageAmericanGuy: advex101: Is it too much of a fact load to point out that the Embassy is in Tripoli. The facility in Benghazi is a consulate. Kind of like a field office.

Americans don't really understand that kind of stuff. Most never leave their home county.

Nonsense. There's 50k+ in Afghanistan this very minute.

You have a funny definition of 'most'

Off the cuff speculation or not, I wonder what the real numbers on that statistic is. What percentage of Americans have traveled to a country outside of the US? Outside the Western Hemisphere?

Less than one third have a U.S. passport, per CNN.


It's the kind of attitude I have heard of and only rarely encountered. I met a woman who was a petrified at the idea of going to a big city, let alone another country. She was a small town lady, not an agoraphobic.
 
2012-09-13 05:42:55 PM
www.broccolicity.com
images.sodahead.com

msnbcmedia2.msn.com
 
2012-09-13 05:45:05 PM

gibbon1: xtragrind: Are morons like you still calling them protestors? So far we know that they had heavy machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and also launched a coordinated mortar attack.

It's pretty simple really, there were protestors, and then there were the Islamist terrorists with the machine guns and rockets. As always if you follow the money it leads from the Islamists to Saudi Arabia.


And when the Islamist terrorists hid their weapons again, they stopped being Islamist terrorists and became innocent unarmed protesters unfairly targeted by America's lust for disproportionate revenge.

/or would be, if the President was Republican
//since this isn't the case, we'll kill some Libyan wedding celebrations, declare the President's great detective skills identified them as the murderers of Ambassador Stevens (including the ones who hadn't been born yet... can't put anything past Al Qaeda), and fly home making memes out of Dubya's "Mission Accomplished" banner
 
2012-09-13 05:47:44 PM

Thunderpipes: Because if it were my family members gunned down because Hopey McChangebutt didn't want to offend anyone by having actual troops protecting diplomats, I would be really pissed.


Sure. But I didn't ask why you were angry, I asked why you were hoping for the families to file suit against the Government.

I think we all recognize that the security (marine or otherwise) provided at this consulate was inadequate, and given the KNOWN instability and likelihood of violence, that this might have been avoidable. But we also know that foreign posts can be unpredictably dangerous.

How does suing the government provide recompense? What exactly do you think that would accomplish? Why do you think this would be an appropriate next step?
 
2012-09-13 05:55:07 PM

HotWingConspiracy: So the right wingers shiatting all over the marines have been incorrect? This is a shocking development.


I didn't see any right wingers shiatting over marines. I did see the massive deflection to Mitt that I expected from Carter v2.0s hand in the entire thing though.
 
2012-09-13 05:58:46 PM
Fark seems full of people with vast international experience.
 
2012-09-13 06:01:46 PM

stevetherobot: fireclown: AverageAmericanGuy: According to this article at CNN, about 30% of Americans have passports. There may be some who traveled to Canada prior to the passport requirements, but as far as eligibility to travel, only a third can today.

Europeans don't quite understand how frakkning BIG the US is. Baltimore to LA is 48 hours of straight driving, per google maps. If we needed passports to travel from DC to Ohio, more of us would have them. And if I had to speak German when I got there, I'd probably speak a few more languages.

Exactly, You could probably pass through every country in Europe Norway with 48 hours of straight driving.



/FTFY
 
2012-09-13 06:04:46 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: tereklusec: Do you really have protocol to destroy documents if rioting protestors or terrorists fire RPGs into a consulate?

Why the fark wouldn't they?


About 10 years ago when a Chinese figher jet slammed into a USAF Surveillance plane and the plane had to land in China, there was a Marine on board who's protocol was to shoot the 10 or so occupants of the airplane and not let them surrender to the Chinese. He didn't.
 
2012-09-13 06:29:33 PM
CNN interviewed a Libyan named Fathi Baja who says he had breakfast with Abamassdor Stevens the day of the attack. Per Mr. Baja, there were four Libyan security guards on duty, armed with Ak-47s, and no Americans. 20 vs. 4 are difficult odds assuming the attackers had the element of surprise, and the 4 defenders weren't prepared to die.

It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

Time interview here
 
2012-09-13 06:48:02 PM

1nsanilicious: tereklusec: WeDemocrats sent dignitaries THEN security personnel instead of the other way around?

WeDemocrats really are the overconfident assholes the rest of the countries accuse us of being.

FTFY


See, no. This is where you are wrong.

The word is "we."

If you fail to understand that and you fail to understand the importance of why you're mistaken then please be clear about it in your reply (if you make one). It is inarguable but if you still feel that you're not in error then let me know and I'll make the appropriate choice based on that reply. For the moment I'll give you the benefit of doubt and hope that you're simply unaware.

Think on it. Really. Normally I'm much more an asshole about these things.
 
2012-09-13 06:49:57 PM

tereklusec: 1nsanilicious: tereklusec: WeDemocrats sent dignitaries THEN security personnel instead of the other way around?

WeDemocrats really are the overconfident assholes the rest of the countries accuse us of being.

FTFY

I'm as remorseful as you are that Democrats are also Americans, but sadly it's a truth we cannot change. So I stand, regretfully, correct in my original statement.


Ah, you had it covered.

What, read the thread entirely before clicking the quote button and typing? Me? Nah... ;)
 
2012-09-13 07:08:50 PM

CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.


If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.
 
2012-09-13 07:13:16 PM

stevetherobot: dervish16108: maddogdelta: dervish16108: What was the Ambassador to Libya doing in an unfortified consulate (unlike the US Embassy in Tripoli) without Marine protection? The situation seems very strange to me

He was doing his job. Which probably is a foreign concept to you.

It was a most unnecessary risk. Responsibility is apparently an alien concept to you.

Says a guy who has no experience with international diplomacy, but still knows better than the State Department and the ambassador on the ground.


According to your logic, the government is always beyond reproach because they have more experience than we are. What an Orwellian world you live in.
 
2012-09-13 07:15:39 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.


The fact that there was a 4-5 hour gun battle lends your entire argument to the realm of..."HEY..I'M A PARTISAN DERP FACTOrY"

Go derp yourself you farking traitor
 
2012-09-13 07:20:07 PM

X-boxershorts: Lt. Cheese Weasel: CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.

The fact that there was a 4-5 hour gun battle lends your entire argument to the realm of..."HEY..I'M A PARTISAN DERP FACTOrY"

Go derp yourself you farking traitor


Where's your sparkly Eagle? The 4-5 hour gun battle was likely Sean Smith and the other ex Seal vs 20. Where's the other 4 bodies if they fought?

Moran.
 
2012-09-13 07:26:35 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: X-boxershorts: Lt. Cheese Weasel: CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.

The fact that there was a 4-5 hour gun battle lends your entire argument to the realm of..."HEY..I'M A PARTISAN DERP FACTOrY"

Go derp yourself you farking traitor

Where's your sparkly Eagle? The 4-5 hour gun battle was likely Sean Smith and the other ex Seal vs 20. Where's the other 4 bodies if they fought?

Moran.


So when you have the citation backing your claims, we'd all like to see it. News all says 4 americans dead. That's it. 3 security officers and 1 ambassador. Don't see any Libyan bodies do you?
 
2012-09-13 07:52:37 PM
img641.imageshack.us

Good to see MSNBC has the proper top story on their site. Must focus on what is important. A few dead americans and some embassies are burning....meh.
 
2012-09-13 08:13:54 PM
The "others" were active Navy SEALS team 3. You will never know their names....
 
2012-09-13 08:23:11 PM

LesserEvil: Since when has today's Republican party given 2 shiats about "ALL" of America?

Since when has today's Democratic party given 2 shiats about "MOST" of America?


Stop. I call Poe's Law.
 
2012-09-13 08:24:52 PM

peewinkle: Hmmmm...... if only there was someone who wasn't full of bullshiat and that understands what's going on...

Link (pops)


Yeah. If only there were.
 
2012-09-13 08:38:54 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: X-boxershorts: Lt. Cheese Weasel: CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.

The fact that there was a 4-5 hour gun battle lends your entire argument to the realm of..."HEY..I'M A PARTISAN DERP FACTOrY"

Go derp yourself you farking traitor

Where's your sparkly Eagle? The 4-5 hour gun battle was likely Sean Smith and the other ex Seal vs 20. Where's the other 4 bodies if they fought?

Moran.


The only security detail in this friendly town was a local security detail and a contracted militia you ,lying turd/.
 
2012-09-13 08:42:56 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: X-boxershorts: Lt. Cheese Weasel: CowboyUpCowgirlDown: It wouldn't surprise me if those 4 Libyans weren't in on it: I'd be shocked if any of them died.

If they weren't in on it, the more likely is they simply disappeared once the shooting started.....Do you honestly think any of those fargin bastards would willingly fight/die defending americans? Please.

Whole thing stinks to high hell. You're doing a great job Obama. Keep it up. You're batting a solid 0 fer so far. Our enemies in this world are watching and laughing.

The fact that there was a 4-5 hour gun battle lends your entire argument to the realm of..."HEY..I'M A PARTISAN DERP FACTOrY"

Go derp yourself you farking traitor

Where's your sparkly Eagle? The 4-5 hour gun battle was likely Sean Smith and the other ex Seal vs 20. Where's the other 4 bodies if they fought?

Moran.

So when you have the citation backing your claims, we'd all like to see it. News all says 4 americans dead. That's it. 3 security officers and 1 ambassador. Don't see any Libyan bodies do you?


Do your own lazy brained self flagellating research you turdstick

Or watch...dickferbrains: Yeah, we get it it. It's a liberal source so you won't click

Again, challenge the content thereof..... or suffer my mockery ad infinitum...
 
Displayed 50 of 307 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report