Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Signs and people with signs impeach obama this morning
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GolfWhiskey" data-source="post: 2269849" data-attributes="member: 8068"><p>Ambassadors in any given nation or assignment have the authority to close their own embassies or vacate the country if they believe their diplomatic staffs are in danger. At any point, Stevens could have said "ok guys let's get out of here" and made that happen. Stevens was a big believer in what his team was doing - he apparently had faith that the situation wouldn't deteriorate as it did as quickly as it did. The answer to your question of "why were they there?" is simple: Stevens wanted his team to remain in place. He requested additional security in the months leading up to the attack, and the refusal/inability of State to provide that might have been evidence enough for a more cautious man to leave, but he decided not to. It was his expressed intent and desire to stay, it's not like he was begging Obama personally to close the consulate for weeks prior and Obama was just telling him "no" because he's dumb or evil or whatever.</p><p></p><p>All of these accusations that are being leveled regarding the President's motives lack one strong element: evidence. I find it troubling that of the 13 embassy and consulate attacks that occurred under Bush, none apparently displayed Bush's ineptitude or dubious motivations. 13 attacks, and not a single call for impeachment based on any one of them. Yet for the last year that's all we've heard from the far right. Impeach because Benghazi.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GolfWhiskey, post: 2269849, member: 8068"] Ambassadors in any given nation or assignment have the authority to close their own embassies or vacate the country if they believe their diplomatic staffs are in danger. At any point, Stevens could have said "ok guys let's get out of here" and made that happen. Stevens was a big believer in what his team was doing - he apparently had faith that the situation wouldn't deteriorate as it did as quickly as it did. The answer to your question of "why were they there?" is simple: Stevens wanted his team to remain in place. He requested additional security in the months leading up to the attack, and the refusal/inability of State to provide that might have been evidence enough for a more cautious man to leave, but he decided not to. It was his expressed intent and desire to stay, it's not like he was begging Obama personally to close the consulate for weeks prior and Obama was just telling him "no" because he's dumb or evil or whatever. All of these accusations that are being leveled regarding the President's motives lack one strong element: evidence. I find it troubling that of the 13 embassy and consulate attacks that occurred under Bush, none apparently displayed Bush's ineptitude or dubious motivations. 13 attacks, and not a single call for impeachment based on any one of them. Yet for the last year that's all we've heard from the far right. Impeach because Benghazi. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Signs and people with signs impeach obama this morning
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom