Monday, October 22, 2012

Republicans care more about diplomats than soldiers

It's not something I would have predicted, but it's hard to make logical sense over the Republican scrutiny of every detail of the four tragic American deaths in Benghazi while having little interest in the events immediately preceding the deaths of thousands of US soldiers under hundreds of scenarios in wars under both Bush and Obama.  I guess diplomats matter more to Republicans?

It's a dangerous world and people make mistakes.  There's no evidence tying security mistakes to Obama and Biden, at less so than the Paul Ryan and the Republican's vote to decrease security funding for diplomats, not to mention Ryan's deception in the last debate by saying no Marines were in Benghazi even though the Republicans had incompetently leaked that the CIA security was present.

Hope some of that comes out tonight, if we are forced to put a microscope on a that small part of the Libyan revolution that otherwise has had enormous positive consequences for Libya and the rest of the world (other than Mali).


Anonymous said...

Dr. Lumpus Spookytooth, phd.

You better hope for a miracle because Romney is running away with it. Dana Milibank's reader circulation starts and ends here. Yes, republicans had little interest in what happened beforehand, because it became irrelevant. The important thing was to proclaim a terrorist attack and go after the people who killed the Americans. You have 0 proof, absolutely squat that any of the attackers even saw the video about Mohammad.

Romney 2012, time to roll back those green programs and put that money back into the sticky black.

Brian said...

Sounds like you're unfamiliar with the amount of wrong info that comes out immediately after a big and confusing event. Egypt and Tunisia were video driven and Benghazi wasn't, and it took a while for that to get sorted out. If the Ds acted like Romney, they would've called all three riots terrorist-driven, and just hurt their credibility.

As for security issues, Republican budget cutters can take as much blame themselves.

Anonymous said...

"It's a dangerous world and people make mistakes."

Tell that to the italian judge putting seismologists into jail for 6 years because they made one.
And, no, mafiosi and venal builders constructing sub-par houses did not get such a harsh sentence.


Anonymous said...

Most of the scrutiny was over the cover up of a forewarned al Qaeda attack on the US on September eleventh.
Admitting it would reveal the hypocrisy of attacks on Bush for the first 9/11.

Which president...
...bailed out Wall Street?
...bailed out GM and Chrysler?
...pushed for an got an unfunded healthcare entitlement?
...said he wanted to close Guantanamo but didn't?
...carried out extraordinary rendition?
...led a troop surge in a flagging SW Asia war? the US involved in a new war in a Islamic country?
...had his effigy regularly torched overseas?
...carried out a program of funding energy companies?
...tried economic stimulus to reverse recession?
...supported and signed the 'patriot act'?
...was ridiculed for playing golf?

Why Bush AND Obama, of course.


Anonymous said...


do you have any evidence that any of the protesters in Egypt or Tunisia saw the video?

Anonymous said...


do you have any evidence that any of the protesters in Egypt or Tunisia saw the video?"

I imagine that merely hearing of it would have had an effect. Furthermore, it is quite likely that many people in these countries would have difficulty believing that the video could have been produced without at least the acquiescence of the US government.

Gator said...

For what it's worth, the UK papers were reporting the attack in Benghazi started as a protest about the film.
Report dated Sept 12.

Reporter in Libya Sept 12.

It's clear the repubs care nothing about this except that it might be a useful bludgeon against Obama.

Anonymous said...

Cutting budgets does not mean cutting security details at specific embassies and consulates.

And Brian are soldiers dumb because they support Romney over Obama 2:1 even though Republicans care more about diplomats?

I love Brian's naive articles about politics! His ignorance knows no bounds.

Jeffrey Davis said...

Amazingly, the disappearance of Judge Crater in 1930 is still unsolved. And that happened in this country with a tiny number of suspects.

Flash forward to the incident in Benghazi. We, of course, still aren't sure what happened. Foreign soil. Massive number of suspects.

Except for two things.

1) Willard Romney rushed to try to extract political advantage from the incident.
2) He has continued to try to extract political advantage from the incident.

Lovely guy. Reminds me a sociopath.

Anonymous said...

Except for two things.

1) Barrack Obama rushed to try to extract political advantage from the killing of Bin Laden.
2) He has continued to try to extract political advantage from the incident.

Lovely guy. Reminds me a sociopath.

EliRabett said...

Cites on 1 and 2 please.

John said...

The public debate is about whether or not those who killed the US ambassador to Libya and three others had seen the anti-Islam movie. I don't think it's the right debate.

The US is hated in much of the Arab world, for several reasons. (US support for Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, US support for leaders like Mubarak, and the US drive to control the oil of the Middle East). Insulting Islam (if it was a factor) was the final straw, not the main cause.

If you want an analogy, consider the Sepoy Mutiny in British India, for which the final straw was a rumor that rifle cartridges were greased with pork and beef tallow. This insulted both Hindus and Moslems.
See this link

Suppose for the sake of argument that the US government has no connection with the anti-Islam film. (IMHO the US govt did not have a connection to the film). Then you have to conclude that the reputation of the US government is so unbelievably bad that they are not believed **even when they tell the truth** (!!)

Brian said...

The Army Times "survey" isn't a representative sample of the military, maybe even not of the AT readers. IOW, useless.

Anonymous said...


Says you, but you're a biased ignorant fool who never served.

Let's give you a chance to prove it's worthless, like 99% of your political articles.

Nope the Miltary Times poll is justan outlier.

I shall grant you a 15 minute recess to remove your foot from your mouth.

Enjoy November.

Anonymous said...


You should stick to science and Brian should stick to local water issue and not get out of his depth (pun intended).

EliRabett said...

the blazing Glenn Beck rag. Sorry, Eli passes on that crap.

Anonymous said...


Suit yourself.

I guess the handy dandy bumper sticker was not enough for you for "politicizing" an event.

Like I said stick to science you do not know jack about politics or common sense for that matter.

EliRabett said...

It's still spinach.

Anonymous said...

Sucks being wrong doesn't it?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Have I found a source you trust yet? Or do you only listen to the stable controlled reserved professional journalists of MSNBC?


cynthia said...

Well, this new Libya is Obama's baby. He had to have it his way, and that meant nothing short of crushing the previous stable regime that had been governing the country quite successfully. Welcome to the new Lebanon on the Mediterranean. Of course, no "failed" (murdered) nation state can do without a U.S. occupation of some sort. This will make it that much easier to justify building military bases in Libya and carry out an occupation much like the one in Afghanistan circa 2008-2012.

Also, Hillary's "we came, we saw, he died" (along with her sadistic cackle) immediately came to mind when I first heard about the Ambassador's murder. To me, that utterance was another marker along the road of America's absolute moral degeneration, as was the media and politico's collective glee at the manner employed by our new allies to deliver 'justice' to Gadaffi.

Anonymous said...

I'm glad to see someone putting this stupid fracas into perspective. In all honesty, people die every day, and to blame Obama for the deaths of 4 officials located tens of thousands of miles away, after these very officials did not ask for more security protection, is stupid.
Not to mention, because it's rarely mentioned anymore, but thousands of more people died in the Iraq War, and some of these thousands were Americans (the only kind of people that Republicans seem to care about). Why should Obama be criticized for these four deaths? Thousands of people die every day in my state. Should I criticize my state Senator for that?
An Exasperated Human Being