Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SD Realtor
ParticipantThat answer is easy. I am interested in getting the facts out on Libya. My vote will not be for either Romney or Obama nor am I registered with either party but in the past have been registered with each party.
While I disagree with many of the moves made by Obama (both on domestic matters and foreign policy) when they are made in the light of day then that is that. I don’t agree with them but am not suspicious of them. Do I feel that Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure? Potentially yes I do. However, I cannot say it will be better or worse then a Romney foreign policy. There is no sample to compare against and I do not fly to the conclusion that Romney will have as poor as a record as Bush did. If Romney does get elected and has a few years to sample and compare against Obama then I will give my thoughts.
In reality one of the two candidates will win and I will be disappointed with both of them. I don’t give the benefit of doubt to any administration, Obama’s or Bush. While you think I may support Bush, you are wrong. His policies were an unmitigated disaster especially with regards to Iraq. My perception of how the press treated Bush is different then yours. While you dug up 3 examples of the media cowtowing to Bush, I found many many other exceptions to that behavior (Dan Rathers story) (especially over the last few years of his tenure) but didn’t find it relevant to this post as it would have diverted the point of the post. Again we have differing opinions on the media treatment of each administration.
Admittedly FOX is a very easy target and indeed they have an agenda stemming from the owner. I simply view them as a counterweight to other media outlets which I feel are a bit more liberal. I take it all with large grains of salt. However it does appear that FOX is driving harder at reporting on the Benghazi sequence of events or at least they are reporting more on it. I understand that they are doing so simply to push the agenda they have. Parsing speculation from facts is the hard part with FOX however there are facts mixed in (at least with this particular story).
Like you said, it will come out (hopefully) in the near future. I wonder however if it would have all come out if FOX did not uncover what they had uncovered.
(Sorry for diverting my original post) hopefully I answered your questions and yes I did bring up the media treatment of Bush.
ParticipantFeel free to answer the question directly. This subject is a rescue mission of American citizens.
While my personal opinion is that I would have like to seen an attempt at a military rescue operation or even a diversion during the attack, it is only that, an opinion. If the call was made by the White House, or a given general of Central Command to do or not do something, it would be nice to know who made that final call.
I think I am more troubled by the way things are coming out after the fact.
it is quite easy to look back and find huge mistakes, corruption and blunders with any administration. That does not excuse the current one. Also I am not referencing any other foreign policy decisions by this administration. I may not agree with them and whether they were blunders or not would also only be my opinion.
Please try not to confuse wanting to understand what happened as well as the subsequent lack of clarification with war mongering if you can.
ParticipantSo obviously you find nothing peculiar about this entire incident enron?
You seem to indicate that the American public should not question what we have been told. That all the correct decisions were made and we should all accept this without question?
ParticipantThe getting the good value part is tough. What you described is available in Scripps but not sure if you would consider it good value. There are some areas of Tierra Santa and even San Carlos that have larger lots as well. I also think there are some areas in Poway that would fit the bill. Finally if you go a bit farther up Pomerado on the east side of it, before it bends back towards 15 in Rancho Bernardo there are some places as well. Also tucked in between Lake Hodges and south Escondido on the west side of I15 there are possibilities. I like that part of UC you are looking at. You could even consider Clairemont as well if you are patient enough to wait until something with a big lot comes up.
ParticipantThe view part makes it hard but not impossible. Otherwise there are many areas that fit the bill. Another option is to pick up a more rundown home on a view lot and remodel.
ParticipantEnron, I did not know any of the stuff that went on with Tora Bora and am enlightened.
Still, it doesn’t explain or excuse what has happened in Benghazi. It pretty much appears it was simply covered up better.
ParticipantYou can make any indictments on Romney as you see fit. The bottom line is that he is not nor ever has been president.
Hobie I have read plenty of stuff on the web similar to what your link pointed to. I am trying to seperate fact from fiction.
All I believe is the following:
1 – In no way do I believe that the military does not prepare for rescues such as this.
2 – I believe that even with preparation, there is substantial risk involved.
3 – I believe that the administration was able to watch what was happening.
4 – I believe that several options were presented to the administration for a rescue with military assets and that these options were high risk.
5 – I also believe that another option presented was to ask the Libyans to attempt to make the rescue and that this option was selected and that this decision was made by the administration.
ParticipantFair points made and points well taken enron.
I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Point 2 however makes no sense and in retrospect is more then likely not true at all. Bin Laden was not only not in Tora Bora, but we probably had no clue where he was.
Also how do you conclude Mitts foreign policy to match GWBs?
ParticipantAfter the 9/11 attacks Bush had unmitigated support. However BEFORE the 9/11 attacks in no way whatsoever did Bush have the press behind him. The honeymoon period ended about 2 years after the attacks.
The question is what would have the press done, not what would Bush had done. If this happens in 2006, 7 or 8 then in no way does the press treat Bush like they are treating Obama now. With the exception of Fox, the press has supported Obama without question or investigation. This presists.
ParticipantI guess we differ in that respect.
In no way do I believe that our military does not plan for situations like this. That the military does not have precise plans for what type of troops, what skills needed, and how they get to and from the targets.
In fact it is 100% inconceivable to me that the military does not have preparations for this sort of stuff. I have two different clients who are ex seals, and they have told me that yes there is in fact a very high level of training for rescue situations like this.
Please don’t confuse my convictions of preparedness with ignorance of the risk. So you said, if there was any way for them to succeed then you have no doubt they would have done it. I believe this is entirely false. I believe that there were options presented and success was a possible outcome given a high level of risk. There is never a situation where success is 100% gauranteed. I think there are always degrees of risk and that the decision made was that there was to much to lose both in human lives, military ops and political capital, to try to save these lives.
ParticipantActually the lack of media coverage is very consistent.
Ask yourself, and be very honest here, if this happens on Bush’s watch is the media behavior the same?
Hobie there has been no report of any air assets sent from any of the bases. Nobody in the military has declared that any air assets were enabled. Nobody in the CIA has, nobody from the state department or from the administration has. It makes things even more frustrating that they had the attackers painted and still nothing was done.
What also is sadly ironic is that the two ex seals defied orders to stand down to save lives. How many more people would have died if they would have followed orders from higher ups?
ParticipantSo that is what is peculiar to me. What is clear is that support was requested, at least 3 times.
Two former seals did go assist those who were under attack. They did so against orders to stand down and in doing so ended up saving lives.
What is not clear is who gave the direct orders to not do anything at all. The closest explanation matches what you said and was given by Panetta who said,
“The basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place, and as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
General Ham is head of US Africa command. Dempsey is Joint Chiefs of Staff. Yet Panetta did not say that specific requests for help were denied. Patraeus also has taken a stance of no requests were denied from him or anyone in his organization.
I understand special ops missions take planning and such. By the same token, I cannot comprehend the strategy of not doing a damn thing. Not a fly by? Not anything?
Ty Woods was one of the guys that went to rescue the operatives. What also does not make sense is that one of the most often quoted creeds of the military is no man is left behind. To have all of the technology and not to do anything, anything at all, simply seems very odd to me. There are 3 bases within 2 hours, Sigonella Italy, (an hour away) as well as Aviano and Suda Bay, both within 2 hours.
So again, what you said about the military chain of command makes sense yet nobody is saying the buck stops here, I am the one that said no.
Here we are 45 days after the event.
What I do believe to be true is that the White House, Panetta and others did have a feed of what was going on and were very abreast of the situation however they did not have any intelligence of it beforehand. Rightfully they were confused yet I cannot believe that they did not present options to the president.
I believe that they presented those options with a proper risk assessment. I believe one of the options was also to prod they Libyans to take action and hope that they would rescue the Americans. This was probably the most palatable decision to the president which is obviously the one he selected. We don’t know if the rescue would have worked, we don’t know if more lives would have been lost, we don’t know how the Libyan govt would have reacted.
However I guess this is what troubles me the most, that when faced with these what ifs the decision made was to stand down. Now instead of facing the music we are getting a stall tactic until after the election which I guess is understandable. However by nature Obama is not a risk taker. I think that there is a tangible point to be made and that is, an unsuccessful rescue attempt in Benghazi would have been quite damaging given the upcoming election.
ParticipantI also like High Valley in Poway.
ParticipantI like Elfin Forest or the rural area in east Encinitas.
-
AuthorPosts
