Barbarians Storm US Embassy in Egypt

Obama is weak in the eyes of foreigners.

 

I am serious. Obama panders to Muslims. After all, he is one of them.

 

Yeah, he is real Presidential. LOL!!

 

You are delusional. Nothing like pandering to the delusional far right.

 

It doesn't help your credibility to call Obama a Muslim..

 

He looked pretty presidential at the repatriation ceremony today. While Romney looked dispicable going off half cocked on Obama before knowing the facts. The first time in living memory that a candidate criticized a sitting president, accusing him of being a traitor and being disgraceful WHILE AMERICA WAS UNDER ATTACK. He didn't even have the facts, and when he finally got them, he doubled down, because he ain't man enought to admit it was a blunder of monumental proportions. He just isn't presidential material.

 

I'd say it destroys his credibility completely.

 

He's a closet Muslim. Quit kidding yourself.

 

The White House says the protests are not directed at the United States. How delusional.

 

You left off 'made the sun rise in the east' and 'delivered gifts to good little boys and girls every Dec 25'. You confuse allowing business as usual with causing something.

Seriously, aside from apologizing to every despot in the region, all he has done was establish the idiot foreign policy we see being rioted against everywhere.

 

BoBo runs the agencies that screwed up the policy in the region and screwed up security for our diplomats and has done nothing Presidential for 5 days aside from fundraising and speech giving.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...-Made-Decision-to-Have-No-Marines-at-Benghazi

Seems the rules of engagement in Libya didn't involve real bullets in our security folks weapons....and, gosh darn it, didn't those pesky terrorists take advantage!

 

ON the contrary, it doesn't hurt ones' credibility to call him an American either.

since we don't know either way.

 

As a true blue 100% foreigner, allow me to describe your post as unadulterated thumb-suck rubbish.

Weak? The man who took Gaddafi down? The man who removed Osama? The man who stopped the leaking away of the few remainding friends that the US had, and tempted many back? Weak?
Let me slip you this bitter pill: "Most Europeans were thrilled when Democrat Barack Obama was elected president of the United States"

And that is because he is so absolutely obviously not the liar and fraud that Dubya was. I was in Holland at the time that 'Murkans re-elected Bush II for a second term. We were stunned. No -- we were shocked. How could the country that claimed to be the bastion of democracy - the flag-bearer of human rights - have elected a proven liar on crucial issues back into power; someone who sat bewildered when he was given the news of 911; someone who sent a decent man, Colin Powell, to the UN to deliver a message to the world which made him the laughing stock of the planet; someone who called the illegal Israeli squats "facts on the ground"; someone who lied about an optional war and then went on to cause the death of tens of thousands of the citizens of the invaded country based on the threat from WMDs that he never could find; the man who gave the rich tax cuts at a time when his policies were making the US debt go stratospheric; the man on whose watch the US dollar cratered; and the man whose actions swelled the ranks of the militant Muslims and made my life less safe.

And then someone of colour comes along and acts differently; acts like a President and not a thug; and you call him weak!!! What news service are you in the habit of watching?

 

I don't get you guys. You are delusional.

Obama has NEVER apologized to anyone for the United States. How about giving us some links to prove this republican lie?

His foreign policy is a darn site better than the neo-cons who managed to get most of the world pisst with America. Arrogance and bullying will do that.

As for his war record, he is no pansy and the bad guys are looking in the skies all the time because they are scared crapless about the drones, which have killed hundreds of them.

Instead of lipservice or destroying a country to champion the cause of democracy, he's done it with finesse and direct action. He isn't responsible for the "arab spring" but he made the move to support it. If the arab nations can develop democracy, peace will ultimately prevail.

If you think that Obama was just business as usual, then you weren't following too closely during the bush years.

 

Right. He hasn't screwed up the policy at all. As for security, perhaps somebody can tell us all why this knowledgeable expert ambassador would travel to a consolate in an unstable area on 9/11 with only a couple of body guards?

AS for doing presidential stuff, you bet. I am sorry that Obama has not delivered a detailed account of everything he is doing, but he's doing it. There are way to many people around him that would "leak" if he was lollygagging or failing to do his duty.

It seems that republican partisanship is so fanatical that even when confronted with the truth they just can't bring themselve to believe it. No wonder they like Romney, their discretionary circuits need rebooting, or maybe they just need to learn to read.

 

Ponder the following, JIMV. I propose to you that the person who fuelled the militancy of radical Muslims was he who:

1) ... caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children by forcing through UN resolution 661, and starving them to death; possibly a resolution that will be classed as a genocidal action by future historians. His name was not Barrack Obama.
2) ... told the world that he was determined to invade Iraq because of the immediate threat of that country's WMDs, then couldn't find them, but went on to cause the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens while enriching his Vice President's cronies. His name was not Barrack Obama.
3) ... on whose watch the Baghdad market was bombed with the reaction being "Tough; crap happens in wars" and the pictures of slaughtered women shoppers went viral; when the Abu Ghraib contraventions of international laws went viral amongst young impressionable Muslims; when the reality of Fallujah (citizens demanding the reopening of their school) and the failed Operation Vigilant Resolve and its use of white phosphorus against civilians was originally denied until Italian investigative journalists exposed the war crimes, human rights abuses, and a massacre by U.S. personnel. That too went viral amongst Muslim youth. His name was not Barrack Obama.
4) ... said that the illegal Israeli settlements represented "truth on the ground" and caused a flare-up of rocket attacks on Israel. His name was not Barrack Obama.
5) ... managed only the most feeble of responses when Israel broke a ceasefire that had reduced rocket attacks by 97%, the direct result of which was Operation Cast Lead which caused the death of 1400+ Gazans in retaliation for 3, yes, 3 Israeli deaths. His name was not Barrack Obama.
6) ... caused an utterly unprecedented swelling in the ranks of militant Muslim opinion and the fuelling of affiliation with terrorist groups. His name was not Barrack Obama.

And you blame Obama for the current levels of militancy? What news service do you mostly watch?

 

Seriously? there goes your credibility.
Trying to delegitimize the President seems an exercise in bigotry. Even when confronted with the truth 25% of republicans still think he's a muslim/kenyan. Ignorance in this case is not bliss, its akin to the utter ignorance we see in muslim mobs going apepoopy over a darn video or cartoon..

 

Its the bubble that republicans live in. They watch FauxNews, they listen to Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Huckabee, they read right wing publications. The billionaire backers of the teapublicans have pegged the intelligence level of their "base" and cater to that lowest denominator with bumpersticker sloganeering of the most complex issues. When one of the faithful whips out a bumpersticker, he thinks he's got a handle on the issue.

Look at economic policy for instance. I bet there aren't that many righties around here that have studied economics and yet all of them are adamant that Obama has screwed it up.

Its astounding to think of the litany of lies they unquestioningly beleive.

 

You're asking the wrong question, Jonsa. The question is why someone in the White House and/or in the State Department didn't make sure the consulate in Benghazi was secure before it was staffed. It's not like the security situation in Libya is a mystery to anyone...

 

Cant help but notice you didnt say a thing regarding Egypt or Libya where the protest occured.

 

The same could be said of any other mainline religion.

 

Since when are the Southern Baptists muslim?
I thought that this rubbish was long dead and buried as explained here (click the blue).

Onalandline, do you perhaps rely on ancient copies of "Insight on the News" or Drudge Report?

 

Heh - as if Leftists don't operate within their own little echo-chambers.

Wanna talk about bumpersticker sloganeering? How's "Hope" and "Change" work for ya, Jonsa?

Let's see, unemployment is at 8.1% and growth is under 2% in what has been roundly described as the worst economic recovery ever. You don't need to be a Nobel laureate in economics to see that the Alinskyite in Chief's policies have been a failure. Heck, Obama said his "Stimulus" would keep unemployment under 8% and that unemployment would be under 6% by now. He's a failure by his own standards, yet Lefties refuse to face the facts and the truth.

Anyone with at least 2 brain cells to rub together warned everyone back in 2008 that electing a socialist president would lead to the crappy economic results we're witnessing today. About the only thing that President Downgrade has accomplished on the economy is saddling Americans with another $5 trillion dollars in debt.

 

I would suppose because the Ambassador didn't think it was necessary. He was the guy on the ground, the expert on libya, if he thought he needed more protection, he would have requested it.

AS for why the consulate wasn't more secure, I have no idea. I'm sure that there are all kinds of security weaknesses in the network of embassies and consulates, after all, a cornerstone of international diplomacy is supposed to be that embassies and consulates are protected by host countries. The State dept does spend about 4 billion a year on security but that includes border security.