|
Post by hisea on Sept 12, 2012 7:11:24 GMT -4
50 Shades of jimmy carter. (CNN) -- The United States ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was killed in a rocket attack on the American Consulate in the city of Benghazi on Tuesday, a contractor working at the mission said Wednesday after seeing Stevens' body. Three American security staff were also killed, said the contractor, who asked not to be named for security reasons. He said he saw all four bodies on the street Wednesday morning. The bodies are now in the Central Hospital in Benghazi, he said. Libyan Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa Abushagur appeared to confirm that the envoy had been killed, saying that Stevens was "a friend of Libya, and we are shocked at the the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi." www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/africa/libya-us-ambassador-killed/index.html
|
|
|
Post by cranky64 on Sept 12, 2012 8:00:55 GMT -4
No worries man O will have the DoS issue an apology like they did for Egypt and all will be better.
U.S. Embassy Condemns Religious Incitement September 11, 2012
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.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 9:07:19 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do?
In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces.
What action did Reagan take in response to that attack?
Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops.
This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today.
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 12, 2012 12:42:04 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. Why were we there in the first place?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 14:48:51 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 12, 2012 17:34:04 GMT -4
The bombing of the American Embassy in Lebanon that killed 63 people.
|
|
|
Post by grova on Sept 12, 2012 19:43:57 GMT -4
The bombing of the American Embassy in Lebanon that killed 63 people. 63 people? Do you have problems with reading comprehension? Where do you get 63 out of that article.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 22:19:02 GMT -4
They all don't hate us.
|
|
|
Post by dej on Sept 13, 2012 0:34:56 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? Apparently the same thing the current President did (Now he has another way he can compare himself to Reagan) In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. So the attack on the Iranian embassy in 1979 wasn't a radical islamist terrorist attack against the United States The attackers were were definitely Islamic, definitely radical, and any attack on a country's embassy by such a group is generally considered terrorism by most international standards.
|
|
|
Post by dej on Sept 13, 2012 1:14:48 GMT -4
The bombing of the American Embassy in Lebanon that killed 63 people. 63 people? Do you have problems with reading comprehension? Where do you get 63 out of that article. He didn't get it out of the article, because he apparently has a better comprehension of history than the article's author, who says 46 were killed in the Embassy bombing. The only way I can figure that the author came with that number was by counting the 32 Lebanese employees and the 14 visitors/pedestrians inside and in front of the Embassy. Apparently the author of the article didn't think the 17 Americans killed counted for anything? This was the attack that led to our Marines not being allowed to carry loaded weapons in Lebanon, so our military wouldn't appear to "warlike" or aggressive (the same reason we had no armor in Somalia years later to recover survivors of the Blackhawk shootdowns) (Note to mj, this was another radical islamist attack that also predates the Marine Barracks bombing, but the response certainly merits the same description of "Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking" by Reagan. As we saw in Somalia, where again the response was to just pull out like Lebanon, and in Cairo, examples of weak apologetic leadership is a non-partisan thing.)
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 13, 2012 5:48:49 GMT -4
The bombing of the American Embassy in Lebanon that killed 63 people. 63 people? Do you have problems with reading comprehension? Where do you get 63 out of that article. Sorry for your confusion MJ! After years of Americans being kidnap off the streets of Beruit and the bombing of the American Embassy that killed 63 people The United States of America sent Warship off the coast of Lebanon while also deploying troops to Beruit to help the fighting that had turned into a civil war. The Marine Barracks Bombing was done later that year after the Embassy Bombing. And let us not forget that when the first barack obama was president a few years before he let our embassy in tehran be overrun and we had a 444 day hostage crisis! 50 shades of jimmy carter
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 13, 2012 12:59:11 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by freefallin on Sept 13, 2012 15:44:41 GMT -4
geez I hope that's not true but this rumor keeps getting leaked. Sounds like he was missing for 9 hours before they found him so can only imagine the horror. This was sovereign soil as is with all of our embassies. We need to get the drones in the air and troops on the ground that are armed now to protect our assets and people at these embassies. If the Obama administration doesn't step up and get firm with these radicals our embassies are in danger of getting overrun and we will only be hearing later of more of these atrocities.
|
|
|
Post by markp on Sept 13, 2012 16:06:13 GMT -4
Start taking more head shots on those who would dare scale the walls... let them meet Mohammad if they're willing to die for him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2012 18:05:35 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? Apparently the same thing the current President did (Now he has another way he can compare himself to Reagan) In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. So the attack on the Iranian embassy in 1979 wasn't a radical islamist terrorist attack against the United States The attackers were were definitely Islamic, definitely radical, and any attack on a country's embassy by such a group is generally considered terrorism by most international standards. You should check the facts on the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979.
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 13, 2012 21:04:22 GMT -4
Please teach me about the Iran Hostage Crisis! I would love to hear the story! ;D
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 13, 2012 21:11:39 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by georgej202 on Sept 13, 2012 22:18:54 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. We are not talking about what happened years ago, the world has changed. We are talking about now and your Hero blew it. I doubt he will have to pay for his blunders because people like you follow his load of crap he feeds. Maybe just maybe if he spent as much time governing then playing golf, going on vacation or campaining we may have avoided this. I used to think Carter was the worst in Modern History but sadly I was wrong. George
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2012 0:00:40 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. We are not talking about what happened years ago, the world has changed. We are talking about now and your Hero blew it. I doubt he will have to pay for his blunders because people like you follow his load of crap he feeds. Maybe just maybe if he spent as much time governing then playing golf, going on vacation or campaining we may have avoided this. I used to think Carter was the worst in Modern History but sadly I was wrong. George Not my hero George, your making an incorrect assumption of me and feel free to quote a previous post where I have "followed Obama's load of crap he feeds". I was making a reference to Reagan, who many, including myself, consider to have been a great President. He had an opportunity to deal a death blow, but he didn't. Time went on, then came the first World Trade Center bombing, the U.S. Cole attack, the U.S. embassy attacks in Africa, the Somalia mission....this war with radical islamic terrorist has been going on for a long time. To heap on Obama that this recent radical attack is his fault for being weak, is very short sighted and not realistic. What has happened in the past or lack of action, is still very relevant today. As for making an assumption about someone, it does goes both ways.....the bikini contest are done at Red Eye's and business is down there, isn't this a good time to head to the land of low property taxes you desire and get out of the state of Maryland you seem dislike it so much.
|
|
|
Post by dej on Sept 14, 2012 0:20:01 GMT -4
So the attack on the Iranian embassy in 1979 wasn't a radical islamist terrorist attack against the United States The attackers were were definitely Islamic, definitely radical, and any attack on a country's embassy by such a group is generally considered terrorism by most international standards. You should check the facts on the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979. So which fact is wrong? They weren't Islamic followers of the Ayatollah? They weren't radical? Or an attack on an embassy and taking hostages isn't terrorism? Which of those fact do I need to check further?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2012 11:00:35 GMT -4
An attack by radical islamic terrorist..... I don't recall back in 1979 that it was called a terrorist attack, that weapons had been used, there was destruction, Iranians killed by the marines defending the embassy or any Americans killed in the attack.
Maybe you weren't old enough in 1979 to recall this or maybe internet blogs and cable news talking heads are spinning it now in a way that sounds more ominous. You're statement of attack makes it sound like it was an armed assault on the embassy, like was done in Libya this week......it wasn't. It was a very large group of university students that swarmed the embassy grounds, just like they had done before in previous months. Their initial desire was to make a statement, just like a lot of university students do all over the world...it ended up morphing into something much more as others got involved as it unfolded.
That was my point of checking the facts.
I'm not making light of it, it was a serious situation at the time and the taking of the hostages was a bad thing. It had major impact on the political landscape...just like we're seeing it now. Which makes me think.....doesn't the timing of all this with the anti-muslim film that was made in a suspicious way and the embassy attacks on a 9/11 anniversary, have an interesting coincidence of timing in an election year.
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Sept 15, 2012 11:56:08 GMT -4
Weapons were used by the "students" that attached the Embassy in Tehran in 1979. The real students are used to create confusion on who to fire on while giving cover to the "students" with weapons. If a true student dies all the Iranians had to say was " They shot and killed our innocent students! That's why we stormed the US embassy! Simple! Now the same tactic is still being used today all over the world! Tell me more PLEASE!
|
|
|
Post by dej on Sept 15, 2012 18:13:21 GMT -4
An attack by radical islamic terrorist..... I don't recall back in 1979 that it was called a terrorist attack, that weapons had been used, there was destruction, Iranians killed by the marines defending the embassy or any Americans killed in the attack. Maybe you weren't old enough in 1979 to recall this or maybe internet blogs and cable news talking heads are spinning it now in a way that sounds more ominous. You're statement of attack makes it sound like it was an armed assault on the embassy, like was done in Libya this week......it wasn't. It was a very large group of university students that swarmed the embassy grounds, just like they had done before in previous months. Their initial desire was to make a statement, just like a lot of university students do all over the world...it ended up morphing into something much more as others got involved as it unfolded. That was my point of checking the facts. I'm not making light of it, it was a serious situation at the time and the taking of the hostages was a bad thing. It had major impact on the political landscape...just like we're seeing it now. Which makes me think.....doesn't the timing of all this with the anti-muslim film that was made in a suspicious way and the embassy attacks on a 9/11 anniversary, have an interesting coincidence of timing in an election year. I was old enough to remember it, as instead of wrapping up my first enlistment, I had opted to extend in service in 1979 because of the lousy job situation. But it is apparently we were both looking at it from different perspectives. I didn't think you were making light of it, but I believe most of the "spinning" by media was done in 1979 and 1980, when they avoided referring to the embassy incident as terrorism, even though the U.S. government and President Carter labelled it as such. Carter's most public reference to it as terrorism was in his January 1980 State of the Union speech (a reference largely ignored by the media at the time): "At this time in Iran, 50 Americans are still held captive, innocent victims of terrorism and anarchy. Also at this moment, massive Soviet troops are attempting to subjugate the fiercely independent and deeply religious people of Afghanistan. These two acts—one of international terrorism and one of military aggression—present a serious challenge to the United States of America and indeed to all the nations of the world." While nobody was killed at the time of the takeover, there were weapons and physical violence. The Americans were then physically beaten and mentally tortured, living with constant and very real death threats for over a year. At least one attempted suicide. It it true that the media generally preferred to call the attackers "students", and there probably were a number of students. However the leaders of the attack were not. They called themselves the "Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line". Later investigations indicate the leadership really was probably the some of the earliest members of the basij militia, which Khomeini also organized in November 1979. Factions of the basij have called themselves "student" groups in years since then as well for cover. I would not compare it to the Libyan attack, which was a fairly small well armed group intent on murder going in, and using a mob for cover. I also believe some elements of the Libyan government, or what currently passes for one, was trully shocked and upset with what happened, The Teheran attack started more like the Cairo attack, where a small group, probably with tacit approval from the government, incited a much larger group for their internal political purposes.
|
|
|
Post by grova on Sept 18, 2012 21:09:42 GMT -4
Weak, apologetic, leadership lacking.....really? If Ronald Reagan was President today, what would he do? In 1983, after the suicide bombing of the Marines barrack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 service members...Reagan called the attack "a despicable act" and pledged to keep American troops in Lebanon to support multinational forces. What action did Reagan take in response to that attack? Answer: Nothing....there was no retaliatory strike and 4 months later he pulled out all U.S. Troops. This attack is considered the first radical islamic terrorist attack against the U.S., and the lack of action and ultimate pull out of troops emboldened terrorist groups for future attacks.....and has landed us where we are today. We are not talking about what happened years ago, the world has changed. We are talking about now and your Hero blew it. I doubt he will have to pay for his blunders because people like you follow his load of crap he feeds. Maybe just maybe if he spent as much time governing then playing golf, going on vacation or campaining we may have avoided this. I used to think Carter was the worst in Modern History but sadly I was wrong. George So I would like to know how you think he "blew it".
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Sept 19, 2012 15:04:45 GMT -4
What happened to muslim outreach?
I guess when all else fails, just 'Blame Bush!'
|
|