In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Gen. Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus
FrancF
Member Posts: 35,279 ✭✭✭
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. "
So who in the government did tell "anybody" not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why-and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations-did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
http://tinyurl.com/94opw7g
So who in the government did tell "anybody" not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why-and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations-did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
http://tinyurl.com/94opw7g
Comments
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. "
So who in the government did tell "anybody" not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why-and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations-did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
http://tinyurl.com/94opw7g
Gen. Patraeus(R) [8D][:D]
haha but anyway thats ridiculous maybe potus is making a swing to show some muscle and try to win some swing votes?
I think a great many people are reading way too much into this, taking the smallest of hopes, rumors, or insinuations and blowing them up into supposedly ironclad and damning evidence against Obama.
How is Petraeus' statement in any way throwing Obama under the bus?
exactly...somebody is telling the truth..and it ain't obama.
Here it the transcript and its very informative.
http://tinyurl.com/8e9m8h7
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Evidently the two Seals on the ground called in for help...twice...and it was refused...by who we don't know. And they were killed. This is a big deal in my book and someone (Sec Lamb? Panetta? The Hil? POTUS?) should be held responsible and action taken. Four brave guys died asking for help from their gov't and were turned down. The CIA is making the statement that they were not the ones who denied the help...the question is...who did? No one died at Watergate....
Sorry if I am ranting, But the Jimmy Carter botched rescue attempt is still a thorn in my side, as it took one of my close family members life.
Evidently the two Seals on the ground called in for help...twice...and it was refused...by who we don't know. And they were killed. This is a big deal in my book and someone (Sec Lamb? Panetta? The Hil? POTUS?) should be held responsible and action taken. Four brave guys died asking for help from their gov't and were turned down. The CIA is making the statement that they were not the ones who denied the help...the question is...who did? No one died at Watergate....
The two former SEALs were CIA. I imagine the CIA is pretty ticked off that this is being dumped at their feet when it was their folks that were left hanging with no military support to begin with. CIA Director Petraeus should resign and walk away from this if he wants to retain his honor. There is no way he'll be able to talk because they'll shove a non-disclosure agreement down his throat, but he should make a simple statement and walk out the door.
Close, but wrong guy(s)- try Allah'bama, Hillary & Panetta.
See, troops deaths, Afghanistan 2009-present.
The administration couldn't allow that.
Video of an American AC-130 raining destruction down on Benghazi would have told the world our policy in Libya was a failure
The administration couldn't allow that.
Disagree. It would have told the world that our Consulate was under attack, and we will fight back to protect our people.
Video of an American AC-130 raining destruction down on Benghazi would have told the world our policy in Libya was a failure
The administration couldn't allow that.
+1 Billion!
Disagree. It would have told the world that our Consulate was under attack, and we will fight back to protect our people.
You're confusing reality with what really matter in politics......perception.
The public and the world don't want to see corrective action taken to correct a problem or crisis.....they'd rather believe the problem doesn't exist in the first place.
The choice was to either admit the failure(right before an election, no less) or to pretend everything was a success and bet that the compound wouldn't be overrun. If the compound hadn't fallen, the attack wouldn't have warranted anymore than a 15 second blurb on the morning news shows.
American lives were lost in on that bet, and heads need to roll.
quote:Originally posted by Leeroy Jenkins
Disagree. It would have told the world that our Consulate was under attack, and we will fight back to protect our people.
You're confusing reality with what really matter in politics......perception.
The public and the world don't want to see corrective action taken to correct a problem or crisis.....they'd rather believe the problem doesn't exist in the first place.
The choice was to either admit the failure(right before an election, no less) or to pretend everything was a success and bet that the compound wouldn't be overrun. If the compound hadn't fallen, the attack wouldn't have warranted anymore than a 15 second blurb on the morning news shows.
American lives were lost in on that bet, and heads need to roll.
RO, I understand where you're coming from. Guess I'm old school. You admit your failures and deal with them. Some people will pretend those failures don't exist or they belong to someone else. I also wouldn't leave my people hanging out to dry, whether my policy was a failure or not.