Obama's second term agenda

I accept your concession.

 

I accept your concession.

 

I knew you would be too lazy to go looking. You are a liberal, aren't you?

 

I call him a Marxist because he is one.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/22/clips-of-obama-apology-tour-undercut-debate-denial-video/

Here is my guess. No later than 30 minutes after the beginning of the attack the president knew. I believe we will find out in the days ahead that a coded message was sent from Benghazi to (*)(*)(*)(*) near everybody saying we were about to lose an ambassador. When I was on active duty we used code words for a variety of things. This would be the kind of message that would go as flash traffic with an override precedence to ensure it was handled swiftly.

There are credible reports that we had an unmanned aerial vehicle over Benghazi during the attack. Those video streams would have been available to the intelligence analysts and others immediately.

And then there are also reports that the video from the cameras at the consulate were also available while the attack was ongoing.

I get it. You like playing games.

 

you couldn't back up your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) when challenged, which is why you lost the debate.

 

define marxism, and provide specific policy examples which make him one.

if you dodge again, which we both know you will, you will have admitted your defeat.

 

What are you, ten years old?

I understand your inability to connect the dots. There is no shame in it. It requires more than a superficial to one or two Marxist slogans to see it. You fail to see the beginnings of things and can only see it when the actions are completed. It is who you are.

I have already laid out my case on this board. You go find it and report back.

 

That is the apology tour. I take offense to any American president going to foreign countries to blame us for the world's problems.

 

Yeah, I think this somewhat sums up what I expect- regardless who is elected. Whether Obama or Romney, I think each will take a different road to the same city.

 

Yep. I spent 20 years doing that particular business. I give him 30 minutes of uncertainty. Others are already giving him less.

There were no protesters. None. There was at least one assault group. There was at least one weapons support group and there was at least one intelligence exploitation group. There is uncertainty over the size of each group. My guess is that there were between 30-60 men in the assault group. I tend toward the lower number. Others believe the number was higher. They were armed with rifles, hand grenades, and perhaps a few light machine guns.

The weapons support group had rocket propelled grenades and probably light machine guns plus a few medium-heavy machine guns. They also had mortars. My guess is roughly 20-30 for RPGs plus another 10-20 for LMGs and maybe another 8-10 for medium and heavy machine guns.

They were not well trained.


I look forward to seeing the declassified UAV video feeds. I look forward to seeing the declassified messages.

The president says he needs an investigation. Why don't we just ask the president what he knew and when he knew it. Let's get SECSTATE Clinton, SECDEF Panetta and CIA Director Petraeus under oath before Congress next week and ask them?

 

He, and probably you, share the same goofy idea that blaming America first and abroad is a good thing.
I do not. He, and you should consider the enormous good we do where we go. I doubt that you will. I know he won't.

Everything he said was wrong.

 

I will pass on those for a while. They add texture to the Lying presidency but are not all that interesting to me.

 

While based upon speculation some of this is probably true but it lacks any real meaning. Assuming the forces of the group that attacked the temporary consulate (not the US embassy) the entire engagement would have taken less than an hour and probably less than 30 minutes. The contracted guards (Republicans support using contractors as opposed to the US military remember) fled the scene almost immediately so there was no real resistance. It would have taken two or three hours to put "boots on the ground" at the consolate even with the US military being in a heightened state of alert throughout the Middle East on 9/11. The "threat" was over before anything could be done about it and the President as well as the US military knew that fact.

I'm not quite sure what "Republicans" are arguing about. All that could have been done was done. While protection of an embassy predominately belongs to the country occupying the embassy the protections of consolates predominatly resides with the host country. A consulate is not an embassy and they deal with matters of commerce and provide a location away from the embassy where minor affairs, such as applications for visas, can be conducted but all of this is channeled through the embassy. In many cases a consolate is an office and not a secured compound.

So what should Obama have done? It was too late to deploy US troops to the ground because the attack was fundamentally if not literally over by the time the White House was informed and it would have accomplished nothing.

 

This is the sort of BS I really dislike. It's amazing that Obama is apparently a fascist AND a socialist AND a muslim and is apparently conspiring to make himself dictator. And how does having a bad economic downturn due to the 2007/2008 credit crash somehow lead to even more bad economic news, especially with the glimmers of economic hope we've been seeing since the summer?

And the paranoia that the PAF are going to be rounded up (assuming they are not planning to launch a coup themselves) is just not there. I'd be more worried about Romney misusing such provisions once it becomes obvious he is a RINO only representing the top 1% of Americans. Watchman may get off on the idea of some titanic struggle between an oppressive government and a bunch of selfless patriots but it just ain't so.

 

thank you for admitting your defeat

 

I would be comfortable with either candidate, politically I think each is within one standard deviation of the middle. My problem is the republican party, with Romney the party will be able to run wild with all the discredited supply side - no regulation crap that buried us in the first place. Look at the bat(*)(*)(*)(*) crazy people who ran against Romney. Santorum, Bachman... really is that the best they could put forward? Republican ideology trashed this country, I'm not quite ready to forgive yet.

 

What time was the WH informed?

 

Explain?
We know the attack took place. We know they used rifles, rocket propelled grenades and mortars.
We know the first attack took less than one hour.
We now know the entire battle took between eight and nine hours.

We know two operators from the CIA Annex, former Navy SEALS, heard the shots, determined what was occurring and asked for permission to engage. This happened at the beginning of the first battle at the consulate. They were not in the consulate. Had they been given permission the entire outcome may have been completely different. Imagine the panic of poorly trained attackers being themselves attacked, in the dark from their rear.

But we know they were denied permission.

We know that the people being attacked sent notice that the Ambassador was in peril. That flash traffic would have gone to the White House Situation Room, The Pentagon, the CIA, DIA and NSA. The message probably also went to the European Command.

We also know now that there was an in extremis response team one hour's flight away in Italy. They are on alert and can deploy in minutes. They were never told to go. They could have secured the CIA Annex before it was attacked. Had the been sent they could have arrived late in the second hour of the attack. Once the annex was secured they could have moved toward the consulate to secure it.

We also know that a C-130 Spectre gunship was two hours flight time away. Had it been diverted it could have arrived late in the third hour of the battle. At this point the battle was not even at its mid-point. This would have been decisive.

We now know this is incorrect. The first attack took about an hour. These were not skilled, trained troops. It was dark which slows everything down for untrained attackers.

By the end of the first battle the regime had denied armed responders three times. The two Navy SEALS went anyway. I applaud them. They helped to evacuate the remaining people in the consulate. They looked for but did not find the Ambassador. They were both killed by mortar fire later in the battle. Had the president sent help they might have lived.

This is disgusting and simply wrong. The State Department elected to hire poorly vetted locals. What disgusts me is you trying to pin this on Republicans. Your statement is disgusting, reprehensible and unacceptable.

This is not true. See above. We could have had the first response team on the ground at the CIA Annex late in the second hour of an 8 plus hour attack. We could have had aircraft overhead at the worst by sometime in the third hour of the attack.

These are the remarks of an ill-informed amateur. If this is the story from the regime you should know that it is the continuation of their lies.

If by that you mean trotting out people to lie for the next month about what happened (a protest because of a movie trailer) then I suppose you are right. If this disgusts you that the president could not be bothered just get out of the way of the military and let the military fight this battle then vote the SOB out of office. And then we need to put the one term Marxist in jail for dereliction of duty.

This is a "cop-out." It is unworthy of you.

This is a complete fabrication not borne out by the facts we already know.

If the one term Marxist does not have the ability to at least get out of the way so the professionals can handle it he has no business being the president. he, his VP, the SECSTATE, her minion, and the SECDEF must go. Today.

 

The Pentagon and African Command (not the European Command) have stated that they did not know the situation on the ground in Benghazi which is why troops were not deployed. They lacked specific intelligence necessary to place troops in harms way. I will defer to the expertise of the military commanders over the region. Other "arm chair quarterbacks" can disagree but the military command, not the White House, made the decisions to not deploy troops immediately to the consolute in Benghazi. I would expect a President to follow the advice of the top military commanders that urge caution.

 

I wish people would be realistic. At least, more realistic. President Obama has done or signed things into law that are very undemocratic, and unconstitutional. Problem is, Mitt Romney would do the same thing. I say that because George W. Bush did the same thing with executive orders, acts, whatever. So did Bill Clinton. And so did Daddy Bush. Reagan too. If you care to know, start reading the laws and acts and executive orders and Presidential Directives and whatnot of our country. See for yourself what direction of control things are truly heading. We do live in a Post-9/11 world. Obama should have been the light that brought us out from the darkness. Instead, he took us running deeper into the abyss.

 

We know that General Ham (AFRICOM) was relieved of duty. The story that is out there is that he refused to follow the president's stand down order. His second in command, apparently a man of low integrity relieved him.

Real generals do not urge caution. This is a fabrication just like all the others.