Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234567891013 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 238
  1. #27
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Ripley, WV
    Posts
    1,369
    The way the US is handling matters with the middle east and any other Muslim country reminds me of studying the "policy of appeasement" that was practiced by Britain and France toward Hitler's Germany in the years leading up to WW2. Anyone who studied that in High School like I did remember how that worked out for the vast majority of Europe? Not good at all for them and we appear to be on that same slippery slope.

  2. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by hearthman View Post
    Here is the statement from the Cairo embassy: The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims - as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

    In the context of an unprovoked attack on not only our citizens, but our embassy. Not only but they killed out Ambassador, staff and a US Marine. That is an overt act of war. You don't respond with worring about the lame excuse for the attacks, which so far appear to be false as this was a premeditated coordinated attack. Any responses on such an attack must be approved through the US State Dept. That means Obama. They are under the gun to respond quickly with firmness and resolve--not starting off worrying about offending anyone. Those posts from Obama himself don't really count because it was HIS agency that responded inappropriately for him our of Cairo that matters. Sure his response sounds a little more firm once the firestorm started and he saw his error and the problem with sitting back. His people also fired the first shot at Romney--not vice versa . Should Romney have responded? Absolutely! If Obama had responded properly, he could have and I think would have backed him but Obama didn't.

    What still is not being discussed by the coverup media is why were they in an indefensible location to start with and why werent' they adequately guarded? I mean, of all the hell holes in the world, where is there the highest probability for a spark in a tinderbox? These places recently underwent a violent militant coup with radical Muslim fundamentalist terrorist who have stated we are their enemy. What did we need to realize they meant us harm--attacking our embassies? Are you kidding me? After all the Bush bashing from 9-11 somebody tell me how these people were left out in Ft. Apache essentially unguarded? The answer is quite obvious-they were bait left out there on purpose and it worked. Obama needed a last minute crisis to stave off defeat in the election but he already blew it.

    This deserves a Congressional investigation as to why these people were let out in one of the most volatile, dangerous places on earth surrounded by enemies with no viable defense or extraction. Why? Sending Marines now is closing the door with horse out of the barn.

    BTW, the Libyan security forces ratted them out on their new secure location. That is aiding and abetting an enemy in attacking the US.
    So as an overt act of war what do you propose the proper response is? And given that the attack may not have been sanctioned by what little government they do have, do you hold their government to task for it?

    How would you have handled this differently?
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

  3. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    806
    Quote Originally Posted by corny View Post
    Marines probably high tailed it into the desert after throwing down their weapons. ..
    US Marines do not high tail it. They take the fight to the enemy...whoever that may be.

    Anyone who has served will find this offensive as well as untrue.
    Avatar is a tribute to my Great Grandfather, Andrew Stewart. This pin was one of his advertisements for his heating and plumbing business. I never knew him but must of inherited his love of things mechanical since I am the only blue collar worker in the family

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    Sure, there is no direct apology anywhere. I think the lack of any demand and/or commitment for justice or respect for the human right of freedom of speech/expression was really wimpy.

    I am also thinking most everyone is annoyed by this: While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others,. That sounds apologetic. For starters, it is dishonest,....National Endowment for the Arts comes to mind with Jesus insults. And the second amendment trumps any denigration of religion. We americans know that, so the statement sounds aimed at muslims abroad. I think it was too, as part of bad policy and not some conspiracy. This has not been a Winston Churchill moment for Obama.

    I would sum that statement up in points:
    1- We abhor violence. [everybody says that]
    2- We abhor religious denigration. [That is not really true]
    3- We have no plans or intention to do anything about either of the two former items.

    The Obama statement was almost a mirror image of the Cairo embassy statement. It might have been better to not have made any statement at all beyond,"We are aware of the situation and taking measures as deemed prudent" and left it at that.
    Well I respectfully disagree.

    IMO he made it clear that it was a deplorable act.

    The OP and others made it seem that he apologised when that indeed was not the case.

    What more do you want ?

    And if he did say more what would it change or be of benefit in some way?

    I ask again to both tech rob and you.

    How would a stronger rhetoric help in this situation?

    What benefit would be accomplished by it?

    Do you really believe that getting up in their face would change anything?
    Last edited by mcjo tech; 09-12-2012 at 11:59 PM.

  5. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,955
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    So as an overt act of war what do you propose the proper response is? And given that the attack may not have been sanctioned by what little government they do have, do you hold their government to task for it?

    How would you have handled this differently?
    Well let Obama figure that out. He backed our mortal enemy Al Qaeda to murder Gadafy who was supporting us now and put Al Qaeda in charge. So he is responsible for everything they do. Obama is our enemy as much as Al Qaeda in my opinion and Obama supporters can put that in their pipe and smoke it. Thank you, thank you very much
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  6. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,265
    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    Well let Obama figure that out. He backed our mortal enemy Al Qaeda to murder Gadafy who was supporting us and put them in charge. So he is responsible for everything they do. Obama is our enemy as much as Al Qaeda in my opinion and Obama lovers can put that in your pipe and smoke it. Thank you, thank you very much
    Did you mean to say that Obama supporters are like Al Qaeda and enemies of yours and this nation?

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,955
    Quote Originally Posted by mcjo tech View Post
    Did you mean to say that Obama supporters are like Al Qaeda and enemies of yours and this nation?
    Apparently you cannot comprehend what you read. I said that Obama supporters can "put that in their pipe and smoke it". In other words in plain English those who support Obama need to understand that Obama is IMO directly responsible for what has happened in Libya and what will continue to happen there (until and if Al Qaeda is overthrown there) now that Gaddafi is no longer around to imprison all the Al Qaeda Muslims he could find.

    They were trying to over throw him and he was sharing intelligence that he got from them with the CIA before we turned on him and sided with Al Qaeda under our great alien leader Obama. Thank you, thank you very much
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,265
    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    Apparently you cannot comprehend what you read. I said that Obama supporters can "put that in their pipe and smoke it". In other words in plain English those who support Obama need to understand that Obama is IMO directly responsible for what has happened in Libya and what will continue to happen there (until and if Al Qaeda is overthrown there) now that Gadafy is no longer around to imprison all the Al Qaeda Muslims he could find.

    They were trying to over throw him and he was sharing intelligence that he got from them with the CIA before we turned on him and sided with Al Qaeda under our great leader Obama. Thank you, thank you very much
    Well I could have sworn the "can" was an "and" the first time I read it.

    Well one post says Obama lovers and one says Obama supporters.

    I am pretty sure it said and instead of can but.......

    My bad I think?

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,269
    In an already starving economy some of you will have us go to war.

    While what happened was a terrible thing, we cannot afford another war...especially one that is not clear. You will have us fighting the people of a country...not it's leaders...we would be killing everything that moved as we are not sure who the enemy is....you will have us lost in another engagement like Iraq for eight more pointless years of wasting money and hating our president even more for claiming mission accomplished when the mission was so unclear that most are unsure there ever was a mission.

    We need to leave the Middle East to itself, as fighting an unclear enemy is a losing battle.

  10. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    S.E. Pa
    Posts
    6,305
    So as an overt act of war what do you propose the proper response is? And given that the attack may not have been sanctioned by what little government they do have, do you hold their government to task for it?

    How would you have handled this differently?

    Let me answer in reverse order:
    I recognize these areas as some of the most volatile hotspots in the world. I conduct a study on the viability of maintaining an embassy or not. If so, is the facility defensible or can it be fortified and improved so it can withstand assaults? If not, you abandon the embassy so it no longer represents a tempting target for our enemies. Part of that defense is a viable security force. That means troops, sensors and intelligence. There should have been sufficient measures in place to give some warning other than the first gunshots. There must be a reaction force within a certain response time or else you abandon the embassy. I think the investigations will reveal this mission was not viable to start with and deliberately left under staffed with security in an indefensible location as bait. There apparently was no proper egress route or plan. Possibly there were no safe room bunkers for the staff to hide in and await the cavalry.

    Now, with a reasonably contingent of Marines, weapons, intelligence and security in place you repel boarders if they attack. You use massive firepower and stomp the everloving crap out of any SOB dumb enough to mess with us. You call in air strikes, chopper gunships, sniper teams, drones and whatever it takes to blast the living hell out of any SOB who tries to assault our position. That's what you do. You have enough firepower that no SOB on earth has the ability to breach our walls, take our flag or burn and desecrate our embassy or injure or capture any of our people.

    Now, as to your question about our response to their government, let me pose a few questions back to you. If a group of nuts here in the US attacked the embassy of another sovereign nation and our government sat by and watched, don't you think that country would feel justified in attacking us?

    What did their country do to warn us, try to stave off the attack or render aid during the attack such as break up the mob? Nothing. In fact, one early report suggests their security people dimed us out on the new secret location the Ambassadour was supposedly moved to and it was there he was captured. One report says he died by suffocation, which means those who "helped" him to the hospita may have actually been his murderers. So yes, their d@amn country is complicit. You're darned right they are. If they cannot control their own people then suffer the consequences what ever we choose to do. We may elect to use softer measures such as rescind our billions of aid and re-instate those loans we forgave. We could attach any assets they may have here. We can do a lot of soft things without firing a shot. We can also send in hit squads to identify and kill as many of these miserable excuses for humans as we can. Yes, assasination squads. If you cannot find it to bomb the whole stinking city, then flush the rats out and exterminate those you can. Offer bounties for the heads of collaborators. Do whatever it takes but make it clear if anyone else gets this bright idea, we'll stomp the living hell out of you and make you regret the day you were born. That's the message we should be sending to these rodents.

  11. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,955
    Quote Originally Posted by mcjo tech View Post
    Well I could have sworn the "can" was an "and" the first time I read it.

    Well one post says Obama lovers and one says Obama supporters.

    I am pretty sure it said and instead of can but.......

    My bad I think?
    I have a bad habit of typing fast when I writing a post and the words don't always have the meaning I meant. So after posting it I go back over it and correct the wrong words for the correct words. This usually takes no more than two to five minutes. For some reason I can't quite do that until I actually post it on the board. Then it sticks out clear and I can correct it.

    The above version I can assure you is my correct meaning after I proof read it. That seems to be the only way I can get it right. I added for instance "(until and if Al Qaeda is overthrown there)" in my last post for clarification right after I posted it and then I came back again and corrected the spelling of Gaddafi. You have to give me at least 5 minutes to get it right as to what I want to say. Thank you, thank you very much
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  12. #38
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    So that was the republican plan eh? Blow up a few embassies and then pledge to go to war obtaining more votes in the heat of the moment?

    Sounds ridiculous....and so does your conspiracy theory.

    Who released this video?
    Were you smoking some good libertarian pot when you posted that? What is the thing with libertarians that they hate all war and believe war is never justified? Everybody smokes pot? Make love not war? What?

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    S.E. Pa
    Posts
    6,305
    As a sign to the world of how furious Obama is and that he means business when he claims we'll get justice, he's off to Vegas for a fund raiser. I'm glad he has his priorities straight.

    Just a reminder: When Bush was told of the 9-11 attacks he took a few minutes to collect his thoughts then addressed the nation properly. He didn't wait for his teleprompter to catch up to him later in the day.

    Here is a video of Obama's retort to the terrorist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8yjNbcKkNY

Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234567891013 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event