3rdnlng Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Who made up the WMD threat again? http://www.snopes.co...r/wmdquotes.asp You mean democrats and republicans were in total agreement regarding the threat posed by Saddam's regime? So both parties must have colluded to lie? Seems a little far fetched. What other explanations could there be? Don't you know that getting Bin Laden, using drones very effectively, invading Iraq and spending more money on defense than anyone else makes us look weak? Little Joey Six Pack is just embarressed (sp) over this. Maybe he should also be embarressed (sp) over his spelling and grammar. His posts are not only painful to read due to their content, but require an interpretation of what words he was trying to use to convey his thoughtless dribble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) That famously predicted 3 a.m. phone call went to voice mail. Timeline: Obama Admin Took 16 Hours to Disavow Embassy Apology A timeline of yesterday's events shows that it took the Obama administration 16 hours to disavow a statement posted on the US Embassy in Cairo website. It appears that the administration's failure to correct the embassy and the doubling down by embassy staff 13 hours after the statement was published prompted Mitt Romney's curt comments about the administration's response. {snip} In any case, the media is demanding to know why Romney jumped on this so soon rather than wait. No one seems to be asking why, instead, it took the Obama administration 16 hours to disavow an obviously offensive and indeed stupid statement. Was no one at the State Dept. in contact with the Cairo Embassy in the 13 hours before they reaffirmed the initial statement at 7pm? Apparently word had not gotten back to the "tweeter" that the administration was not thrilled. I, for one, think that we should cut the administration some slack, after all it takes time to conduct a poll and gather a focus group. . Edited September 13, 2012 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Knowing your background a little bit as I do, Chicot, what is your opinion on what can be done (if anything) to correct this problem? Is it hopeless? It's a difficult question. The ultimate aim should be a world where any nutjob can make a video, cartoon, blog....etc saying whatever they like about Islam and muslims will just say "so what?" as a response. Sadly, I don't think that's going to happen any day soon. In the absence of that, the only thing that can be done is to put pressure on nations to not let any demonstrations get out of hand. Ironically enough, dictators are a lot better at that sort of thing - it's hard to imagine that this would have happened in Libya had Gaddafi still been in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 There is also talk that this may be a planned attack coordinated by our friends from the Islamic brotherhood or al qaida. This was to coincide with the anniversary of Sept 11 and the mob was chanting " Obama we are all osamas" or something similar. Maybe because we've spent the past two weeks spiking the "We killed Osama Bin Laden" football over and over at the convention? Maybe because Joe Biden keeps screaming "Osama Bin Laden is Dead and GM Is alive" everyday? Maybe because a Seal is on TV pusing a book that details how we killed Bin Laden? Or maybe because it was the anniversary of 9/11 and anyone with a lick of sense realizes it was a coordinated attack? No. It was a movie. Because movies cause violence. You have to be a monster-sized dumbass to think that stupid movie clip is the cause of what's happening. Hey...anyone know what time Obama is on Leno tonight? Is he flying straight to the studios from the Las Vegas party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 States don't wage war on mobs. I know that's sort of the idea behind the "war on terrorism," but look how great that's going... Which is actually why what happened at the Egyptian embassy is far more important that Stevens' being killed. The Egyptian president had forewarning and did nowhere NEAR enough to protect the embassy. Libya's a crime...Egypt's an international incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Which is actually why what happened at the Egyptian embassy is far more important that Stevens' being killed. The Egyptian president had forewarning and did nowhere NEAR enough to protect the embassy. Libya's a crime...Egypt's an international incident. Great point--though, what's the punitive precedent for the Joe Paterno "you could have done more" offense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Great point--though, what's the punitive precedent for the Joe Paterno "you could have done more" offense? We blast Van Halen at them until they lose all faith in God, just like Noriega. Is there anything Van Halen can't solve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 We blast Van Halen at them until they lose all faith in God, just like Noriega. Is there anything Van Halen can't solve? NOPE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Great point--though, what's the punitive precedent for the Joe Paterno "you could have done more" offense? It depends. If you're Genghis Khan, you destroy the country so thoroughly that there's no historical memory of it. Genghis pretty much invented "diplomatic immunity." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings. http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html When I asked National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor if the president had attended any meetings to discuss the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) since Sept. 5, he repeatedly refused to answer. He noted that Obama had attended a principals meeting of the National Security Council on Sept. 10 and reiterated that he reads the PDB. “As I’ve told you every time you ask, the President gets his PDB every day,” Vietor told me by e-mail, adding this swipe at Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush: “Unlike your former boss, he has it delivered to his residence in the morning and not briefed to him.” (This new line of defense was echoed this morning by my Post colleague, Dana Milbank, who writes that Bush was briefed every dayby his intelligence advisers because he “decided he would prefer to read less.”) Vietor’s reply is quite revealing. It is apparently a point of pride in the White House that Obama’s PDB is “not briefed to him.” In the eyes of this administration, it is a virtue that the president does not meet every day with senior intelligence officials. This president, you see, does not need briefers. He can forgo his daily intelligence meeting because he is, in Vietor’s words, “among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet.” Holy smokes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 do you all want some cheese with that whine? WWMD? Myth Romney would do what exactly? Start carpet bombing Libya and Palistine and Iran and Jordan and Syria and Yemen and Pakistan and Somalia and Sudan and Egypt and Indonesia and North Korea and Obama made his statement AFTER he got the intelligence reports. Myth reacted w/o the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 We blast Van Halen at them until they lose all faith in God, just like Noriega. Is there anything Van Halen can't solve? Which Van Halen though? The original DLR version, Van Hagar or (gulp) the Gary Cherone version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings. http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html [/size][/font][/color] Holy smokes. The only thing this article opinion piece proves posits is the disproportionate relationship between foreign policy success and security briefings. Thanks for bringing that to light. Edited September 13, 2012 by The Big Cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 how is killing Osama Bun A hole and 17 #2's being "friendly" AND sending "mixed messages to the world" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Which Van Halen though? The original DLR version, Van Hagar or (gulp) the Gary Cherone version? That...never existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 do you all want some cheese with that whine? WWMD? Myth Romney would do what exactly? Start carpet bombing Libya and Palistine and Iran and Jordan and Syria and Yemen and Pakistan and Somalia and Sudan and Egypt and Indonesia and North Korea and Obama made his statement AFTER he got the intelligence reports. Myth reacted w/o the facts. Yet when Bush was slow to react after 9/11, they made a movie about it And where is Palestine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 how is killing Osama Bun A hole and 17 #2's being "friendly" AND sending "mixed messages to the world" Read you own posts. Earlier you said it was a sign of weakness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Which Van Halen though? The original DLR version, Van Hagar or (gulp) the Gary Cherone version? DLR all the way. Anything else is Chickenfoot to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Apparently Obama has no need for regular intel briefings. http://www.washingto...54e1_story.html [/size][/font][/color] Holy smokes. except that there's no longer daily in-person briefings In reality, Obama didn’t “attend” these meetings, because there were no meetings to attend: The oral briefings had been mostly replaced by daily exchanges in which Obama reads the materials and poses written questions and comments to intelligence officials. This is how it was done in the Clinton administration, before Bush decided he would prefer to read less. verified by the Press Secretary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 except that there's no longer daily in-person briefings verified by the Press Secretary Just because someone like Millbank explains that "this is just the way things are done by Clinton and Obama" doesn't necessarily make it the right thing to do. The Middle East is on fire. Four Americans were killed on the anniversary of 9/11 because no one in DC was prepared for the attacks. Maybe, y'know, he should have some meetings with people. Face to face. Hear what is happening as it's happening as opposed to, y'know, reading a piece of paper. Seems to me you might want to cover your bases on the anniversary of 9/11. Unless you're somehow under the impression that having four Americans murdered in a coordinated terrorist plot is, y'know, not that big a deal and something we can review on a Blackberry. In which case, you're absolutely correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts