Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

LexusLover · 06-10-2013, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flghtr65

... this scandal is about trying to subtract votes from Hillary Clinton. ....

.. it is for you. But not for me. I "assume" Ambassador Stevens was a Democrat, but that has absolutely nothing to do with my comments.... and it has NOTHING to do with taking votes from Clinton .... this crap came up when it happened. It was ignored by the "mainstream" media ... almost choked on the words. It's about "dereliction of duty" by a commander .. in this case ... the CIC.

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

.. it is for you. But not for me. I "assume" Ambassador Stevens was a Democrat, but that has absolutely nothing to do with my comments.... and it has NOTHING to do with taking votes from Clinton .... this crap came up when it happened. It was ignored by the "mainstream" media ... almost choked on the words. It's about "dereliction of duty" by a commander .. in this case ... the CIC.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

LexusLover · 06-10-2013, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

yes later dumbass just like I said in post 75...

So how much later was the "small arms fire" .... after the rock throwing ...

and then how much later were the rpg's .... after the small arms fire ...

and then how much later were the mortars ... after the rpg's?

And in that time line OF YOURS ... where would it be that 200 marines would not be able to stop the .....

.. rock throwing?

... fire starting?

.. "small arms fire"?

.. "rpg's" .....?

.. "mortar fire"?

Ok .... we could spare 200 ... so .... how about 20?

And in that time line OF YOURS ... where would it be that 20 marines would not be able to stop the .....

.. rock throwing?
.. fire starting?

.. "small arms fire"?

.. "rpg's" .....?

.. "mortar fire"?

Oh, BTW: http://www.roadscholar.org/ ...

... NOW I recommend that you sneak back up and take a peek at my original post!

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So how much later was the "small arms fire" .... after the rock throwing ...

and then how much later were the rpg's .... after the small arms fire ...

and then how much later were the mortars ... after the rpg's?

And in that time line OF YOURS ... where would it be that 200 marines would not be able to stop the .....

.. rock throwing?

... fire starting?

.. "small arms fire"?

.. "rpg's" .....?

.. "mortar fire"?

Ok .... we could spare 200 ... so .... how about 20?

And in that time line OF YOURS ... where would it be that 20 marines would not be able to stop the .....

.. rock throwing?
.. fire starting?

.. "small arms fire"?

.. "rpg's" .....?

.. "mortar fire"?

Oh, BTW: http://www.roadscholar.org/ ...

... NOW I recommend that you sneak back up and take a peek at my original post!

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

NiceGuy53 · 06-10-2013, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

yeah how about the truth rather than political talking points, take Benghazi for instance ..

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

The excuse the Obama administration (SOD Panetta) gave for not sending help was that it could not get there in time. Like they knew in advance how long the attacks would last.

The bigger point here, which I wouldn't expect someone like you to understand, is why was the consulate left unguarded and if forces were not close enought to respond promptly, then why weren't forces stationed nearby in advance to respond if needed. This was the anniversary of 9-11 and there had been prevous attacks in Benghazi.

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceGuy53

The excuse the Obama administration (SOD Panetta) gave for not sending help was that it could not get there in time. Like they knew in advance how long the attacks would last.

The bigger point here, which I wouldn't expect someone like you to understand, is why was the consulate left unguarded and if forces were not close enought to respond promptly, then why weren't forces stationed nearby in advance to respond if needed. This was the anniversary of 9-11 and there had been prevous attacks in Benghazi.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

In the aftermath, some say that troops or a fighter jet should have been sent over the consulate to scare off the attackers — although one expert recently pointed out that both options were hindered by long travel times.
"Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals," Gates also reasoned, "I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances."
Gates said that U.S. military forces are noted for "planning and preparation before going into harm's way," but in the chaos of the attack, "there just wasn't any time to do that

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...#ixzz2VrF3vaM1

LexusLover · 06-10-2013, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

So what? You are the one who is stuck on stupid. You have taken the "time-line" and "Gates-line" ... "hook, line, and "STINKER" *

* For those spelling queens who patrol the board ... the T was intentional!!!!!

Given the environment (just as the Brits saw it 3 months earlier) we should have had are property guarded with our people and not a bunch of trainees headed for Syria.......... you think they "evaporated" in thin air?

This was Obaminable's "Bay of Pigs" .... the "common" denominator?

But you keep parroting the "talking points"!! And calling folks names!

I B Hankering · 06-10-2013, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

yeah how about the truth rather than political talking points, take Benghazi for instance ..

http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...ilitary-2013-5

Tsk, tsk, tsk, CBJ7. "Political Talking Points" is what Odumbo, Carney, Hildabeast and Susan Rice proffered in the wake of Benghazi: not the "truth."

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So what? You are the one who is stuck on stupid. You have taken the "time-line" and "Gates-line" ... "hook, line, and "STINKER" *

* For those spelling queens who patrol the board ... the T was intentional!!!!!

Given the environment (just as the Brits saw it 3 months earlier) we should have had are property guarded with our people and not a bunch of trainees headed for Syria.......... you think they "evaporated" in thin air?

This was Obaminable's "Bay of Pigs" .... the "common" denominator?

But you keep parroting the "talking points"!! And calling folks names!

you weren't there

NiceGuy53 · 06-10-2013, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So what? You are the one who is stuck on stupid. You have taken the "time-line" and "Gates-line" ... "hook, line, and "STINKER" *

* For those spelling queens who patrol the board ... the T was intentional!!!!!

Given the environment (just as the Brits saw it 3 months earlier) we should have had are property guarded with our people and not a bunch of trainees headed for Syria.......... you think they "evaporated" in thin air?

This was Obaminable's "Bay of Pigs" .... the "common" denominator?

But you keep parroting the "talking points"!! And calling folks names!

+1000

CBJ7, stays stuck on stupid 24/7.

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceGuy53

+1000

CBJ7, stays stuck on stupid 24/7.

In the aftermath, some say that troops or a fighter jet should have been sent over the consulate to scare off the attackers — although one expert recently pointed out that both options were hindered by long travel times.
"Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals," Gates also reasoned, "I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances."
Gates said that U.S. military forces are noted for "planning and preparation before going into harm's way," but in the chaos of the attack, "there just wasn't any time to do that

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/gates...#ixzz2VrF3vaM1

Im stuck on truth not talking points

NiceGuy53 · 06-10-2013, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

you weren't there

And you and Gates were there? LMAO! FYI, Gates resigned as SOD on July 1, 2011.

And surely you can come up with something better, then just posting the same old crap over and over again!

I B Hankering · 06-10-2013, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

you weren't there

Neither were Susan Rice, Hildabeast or Odumbo. Gregory N. Hicks was there.

CJ7 · 06-10-2013, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceGuy53

And you and Gates were there? LMAO! FYI, Gates resigned as SOD on July 1, 2011.

so? what does the time of his resignation have to do with his PROFESSIONAL opinion about Benghazi?

NiceGuy53 · 06-10-2013, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

so? what does the time of his resignation have to do with his PROFESSIONAL opinion about Benghazi?

"Professional opinions" are a dime a dozen. Who cares what Gates thinks, well besides you? LOL.

Like IB said, what about the professional opnion of Gregory Hicks who was there in Libya and was the last person to talk to Amb. Stevens by phone as the attack was unfolding?

And you chose to ignore my question on why the consulate was left unguarded on the anniversary of 9-11 and why forces were not in position in advance to quickly respond to any attack in the region.