Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Best elections data available.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:37am
You are correct, attacks happen, and no one is laying blame on Obama for a terrorist attack. 

But, you are missing the point, (which is no wonder since the media is covering up for Obama, just to get him elected again) Obama had TIME to do something. AND DIDN'T, he CHOSE to NOT send in support. Even though he had the mortar guys lit up with a laser showing their EXACT location. And yet, did he send a missile? 

Nope. 


Did he send special forces WHO WERE IN THE AREA. Nope. 

Did he watch the video LIVE while it was happeneing. Sure looks like he did. 

And yet, he did NOTHING while our people were murdered ON OUR OWN SOIL. 

THAT is Obama. 


AND that is our media as liberals will cover for this guy even when people die because of his lack of leadership. While they let him and the media use a youtube video to blame this all on... It is pathetic. 

Even FACEBOOK is doing their best to cover this up... 


Failure after failure, and yet, the media still covers for him. Interesting how during Iraq the war casualty list was covered EVERY SINGLE DAY, and yet, when Obama is running the war in Afghanistan, it is rarely mentioned, even though the death count has gone crazy with all the liberal "war" rules, that tie the hands of our military. 

Benghazi is just another example that liberals running "protection" and a war is just stupidity. As they think rubber bullets, and no armed guards is a good idea. It is the old "strength through bowing" ideology. 

Failure. 




Edited by FreeEnterprise - 31 October 2012 at 7:38am
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:39am
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

But the 9/11 attacks didn't just come down to "we got hit." We knew there was chatter, we had warnings, we ignored.

This is where you run into problems playing the blame game no matter what your political persuasions.

When Bin Laden was killed and Obama "took credit," the right was up in arms.He had nothing to do with it, he just gave the okay, etc.

But now something bad happens in the same distant region of the world and itsentirety his fault, process be damned.

I've said it a million times-you won't win an election by firing accusations off full auto at your opponent, you win it by methodically picking your shots. If you bombard the American people with a million accusations, just as the left did under Dubya, the people will see you as whiny.

The other problem is that, in issues such as this, they're going to run straight to your past failures. This is a never ending argument of accusations.

So apply the conspiracy theory test. What did Obama stand to gain by purposely allowing American diplomats to die and right before an election no less?

So I believe it's fairly likely he didn't purposely allow this incident to happen for some sinister reason, and by that logic I see it as a possible mistake at worst, but really I'm in no position to judge because I about as much about strategic reaction as I know about nuclear reaction (not alot.)

Mistakes that cost lives are tragic, but they happen every day in the countries were wage war in at the cost of thousands of lives. I don't see conservatives lined up to crucify military leaders.

But time will tell, I could always be entirely wrong. Regardless, there are more pressing issues that are being entirely ignored every time the GOP tries to bring an issue like this to the forefront.


It doesn't have to be a conspiracy to highlight a grievous mistake. How many days after 9/11 did conspiracy theories about Bush shooting down the Pennsyvania flight or staging the attack as an excuse for war start showing up? **edited**, NatGeo and the History Channel STILL show that stuff.

Now, i preface this by saying the recent attacks were nowhere near the 9/11 scale, clearly. All I'm saying is that it seems to me like Benghazi has gotten very little coverage, especially when you consider some of the facts that came to light AFTER the initial reports(there was no protest, no sign of the video that Obama condemned had anything to do with it, etc.)
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:58am
Originally posted by evillepaintball evillepaintball wrote:

Anyone who thinks they know all of the facts about things like that, especially in cases where CIA and SF are involved, is a moron. Your security clearance does not go that high.


Yeah, you are right, we should just take the word of Obama...

This was clearly a mob that was mad about a trailer on youtube or something.... Oh wait. 



We used to have a media that would have gone crazy getting to the bottom of something like this, course now with our JournOlist media, all they care about is the (R) or (D) behind your name. If it is a (D) they get "protected" with no questions asked. 


Oh wait, Obama actually said last night that America "we leave nobody behind"...  when talking about Benghazi oh wait, the storm...



Seriously, you can't make stuff like this up, Obama and the media are so pathetic. 

A few outlets are finally putting on their big boy reporter pants and starting to THINK about asking some questions...




The New York Post calls out the media on their LACK of coverage on Benghazi. Because... Liberals. 


"Where is the Benghazi media feeding frenzy?

I don’t think there’s a conspiracy at work. Rather, I think journalists tend to act on their instincts. And, collectively, the mainstream media’s instincts run liberal."




Edited by FreeEnterprise - 31 October 2012 at 9:00am
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 9:47am
USAF-I agree that mistakes should be called out and certainly more so at the chart of life. But in situations like this, I see a pattern-right wing media is crucifying him while the left is defending him. There's too much opinion and not enough qualified opinion. Without a full breakdown of where everyone was at, what the protocol is, what the chain of command is, etc its impossible to really say what the mistake was or if there was a mistake. The picture the right is painting of Obama is of a dude in the bat cave with a giant screen showing the ambassador being murdered and having a magic button that gets troops there in 2 minutes flat.

FE-I don't understand the "he refused to call it a terrorist attack" criticism. Even if he did purposely call it something else, that isn't indicative of how the powers that be handled the situation.
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:09pm
It still isn't about what they called it. It is about the White house NOT sending support. The attack when on for 7 hours or more. 

PLENTY of time to actually DO something to help OUR citizens who were under attack. 

And yet...




And where is the media "getting to the bottom of this"? Oh yeah, it is THEIR guy. 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10950
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:23pm


/obligatory
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
evillepaintball View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not sexy - only dangerous to self

Joined: 08 March 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4924
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote evillepaintball Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 1:38pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:







2012/10/31/gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white

gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white

gingrich-rumor

rumor
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 1:46pm
I can't decide what's less reliable, the part about the rumor or the part about Gingrich.
Back to Top
jmac3 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Official Box Hoister

Joined: 28 June 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 9201
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jmac3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 2:21pm
I don't know much about how wars work, but I'm pretty sure just telling a group of soldiers to attack(counter attack?)in a country such as Libya is kind of a big deal.

I mean maybe I'm wrong(probably) but I don't think it's as easy as calling the seat team because someone tried to rob a bank.

Real life =/= rainbow six.
Que pasa?


Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10950
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 October 2012 at 10:32pm
Originally posted by jmac3 jmac3 wrote:

I don't know much about how wars work, but I'm pretty sure just telling a group of soldiers to attack(counter attack?)in a country such as Libya is kind of a big deal.

I mean maybe I'm wrong(probably) but I don't think it's as easy as calling the seat team because someone tried to rob a bank.

Real life =/= rainbow six.


Especially considering AFCOM isn't anywhere near Africa. Right now we have one way in and one way out of Africa. Djibouti. Anyone who thinks we can just send people running in all guns blazing in helicopters doesn't understand the fact that there are a TON of shoulder-fired SAMs in the hands of insurgents over there. We simply don't have the ability to react quickly in Africa right now.
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 8:39am
I have never in my lifetime seen a press so ready to NOT ask questions when American citizens are killed by our inaction...

Course, if they did dig, what would they find?...


"The nature of the Benghazi disaster is now clear.  Ambassador Stevens was engaged in smuggling sizable quantities of Libyan arms from the destroyed Gaddafi regime to the Syrian rebels, to help overthrow the Assad regime in Syria.  Smuggling arms to the so-called "Free Syrian Army" is itself a huge gamble, but Obama has been a gambler with human lives over the last four years, as shown by the tens of thousands of Arabs who have died in the so-called Arab Spring -- which has brought nothing but disaster to the Arab world.

For the last four years, the Obama policy has been to offer aid and comfort violent Islamic radicals in the delusional belief that their loyalty can be bought.  We therefore betrayed Hosni Mubarak, our 30-year ally in Egypt, so that the Muslim Brotherhood led by Muhammed Morsi could take over.  Obama indeed demanded publicly that Mubarak resign, for reasons that never made any sense at all.  Egypt went into a political and economic tailspin, and the Muslim Brotherhood were elected.  The Muslim radicals have now purged the only other viable political force, the army and police, to protect their monopoly on power.  We have colluded in that betrayal.

In Libya, we betrayed Moammar Gaddafi, who had surrendered his nuclear program to the Bush administration.  In Afghanistan, we betrayed the central government set up by the Bush administration and negotiated with the fanatical war sect of the Taliban to take over.  The Taliban entered our history when they gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in the years before 9/11/01 to plan, train, equip, and implement the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.  The Taliban are our fanatical theological enemy, as shown by their sadistic attempt to assassinate 14-year-old women's rights advocate Malala Yousuf.

Afghanistan has many thousands of Malalas we will never hear about.

Our consistent policy of betrayal of moderate Muslims in favor of radical Islamofascists goes hand-in-hand with our appeasement of the Iranian Khomeinist regime, which is the most America-hating Shiite regime, now facing competition from America-hating Sunni regimes in Egypt and elsewhere.  It also fits our cooperation with Turkey's "neo-Ottoman" regime, which has also purged the Turkish army and police to remove modern-minded Turks from power.  Egypt and Iran will soon have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles.

We have therefore followed a single "community disorganizing" policy toward the Muslim world, consisting of betraying moderates to bring theocratic fascists to power.  Obama "explained" that policy in a publicized argument with Hillary Clinton at the White House when Mubarak was overthrown.  His explanation?  Fascist revolutions are "organic," and therefore more stable than moderate revolutions.  Obama's fantasy policy runs contrary to U.S. foreign policy since World War I.

The biggest loser in this mad administration has been hundreds of millions women of the Muslim world, who were on a path to modernity and freedom until Obama and Hillary Clinton betrayed them.  Today they are shut inside the prisons of sharia law.

The second-biggest loser has been relative stability in a great geographical swath of the Muslim world, from Afghanistan and Pakistan across the Middle East, all the way to Tunisia and Morocco.

The third-biggest loser has been our anti-proliferation policy against the spread of weapons of mass destruction among developing nations.  From fighting proliferation, we have turned to aiding it.

Those three Horsemen of the Apocalypse are now out of the barn and riding free.

In Benghazi, al-Qaeda showed that they could not be bought even by our back-stabbing policy.  Our Benghazi arms-smuggling base was attacked by elements of AQIM (al-Qaeda in the Maghreb) in an act of betrayal against our fantasy-driven way of doing things.  The American betrayer was itself betrayed, and Obama-Hillary could do nothing to defend the Americans under attack at the Benghazi arms-smuggling base, because any public revelation of the truth would rip the cover off our mad actions and focus the hatred of Muslim nations on the United States.

The evidence now shows that Obama was aware of the attack within 55 minutes of the start.  It lasted for six or seven hours, and Obama consistently countermanded standing orders to protect Americans under attack in the Africom command area.  General Ham has now been fired for following standard U.S. policy to defend American personnel.  He took an honorable stand and was fired.

In Syria, the Assad regime now has a legitimate basis to convict us of deadly dabbling in the Syrian civil war.  Russia and China are likely to take up Assad's cause at the United Nations.  They would be right on the facts.

Because the Benghazi attack coincided exactly with the AQ attack on our Cairo Embassy, both on September 11 of this year, this was apparently a central command decision by AQ, presumably ordered by Osama bin Laden's successor, Al Zawahiri, in Pakistan using a video released on the web shortly before those attacks.  The message was "al-Qaeda lives!"  Everybody who saw the news photos that day got that message.  Only Obama is in public denial.

Because the Egyptian regime chose not to defend our embassy, we know that Muhammad Morsi was in cahoots with the AQ attack.  Host governments always have the first responsibility to defend accredited embassies.  Egypt "forgot" to defend us, and that was the message.

The purpose of the AQ attacks was to embarrass the United States, and to show us to be a paper tiger, precisely the way Ayatollah Khomeini did to Jimmy Carter.  AQ also wanted to tear off the cover of the Benghazi arms-smuggling operation, to make us look like a treasonous ally, which, as it turns out, we are.  All of our allies around the world, from South Korea and Japan to Israel, Australia, and Norway, must now be reassessing our reliability.  One major betrayal of our allies is enough to shatter sixty years of faith in American leadership.

Here is the evidence as published in the Jerusalem Post, in an interview with retired  counterintelligence professional Clare Lopez.  The credit for the exposing the U.S. arms-smuggling conspiracy that just capsized goes to Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy (SecureFreedom.org) and other alert conservative columnists around the web."


They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
Apu View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Funny/Ironic Title

Joined: 25 January 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 6470
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Apu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 1:44pm
...DOTDOTDOT...

Political debates aren't even fun with FE around. No offense FE, just sayin'.


Edited by Apu - 01 November 2012 at 1:46pm
I need a new Sig...
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 2:36pm
Holy copypasta batman. I'd love to take the time to pick that editorial apart (it's an editorial, not a story) but if you can't find the time to write out your actual thoughts, I'll just copy/paste a response to it myself. 
 


Back to Top
evillepaintball View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not sexy - only dangerous to self

Joined: 08 March 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4924
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote evillepaintball Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 2:58pm
Originally posted by tallen702 tallen702 wrote:

Originally posted by jmac3 jmac3 wrote:

I don't know much about how wars work, but I'm pretty sure just telling a group of soldiers to attack(counter attack?)in a country such as Libya is kind of a big deal.

I mean maybe I'm wrong(probably) but I don't think it's as easy as calling the seat team because someone tried to rob a bank.

Real life =/= rainbow six.


Especially considering AFCOM isn't anywhere near Africa. Right now we have one way in and one way out of Africa. Djibouti. Anyone who thinks we can just send people running in all guns blazing in helicopters doesn't understand the fact that there are a TON of shoulder-fired SAMs in the hands of insurgents over there. We simply don't have the ability to react quickly in Africa right now.

Its actually "AFRICOM" and it's HQ is in Stuttgart, Germany.  Fun fact, AFRICOM just got a new commander. According to the Pentagon 
""The speculation that General Carter Ham is departing Africa Command due to events in Benghazi, Libya, on [Sept. 11,] 2012 is absolutely false,” Dempsey said in his statement. “General Ham's departure is part of routine succession planning that has been ongoing since July. He continues to serve in Africom with my complete confidence."


This seems rather odd however, considering the a change of command ceremony for a 4-star combatant command is usually a pretty big affair, and that I live here and didn't even know it happened until someone told me after the fact.  Those things have always been mandatory attendance for all senior leaders that are available.  
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 6:56pm
This is what we get for electing a weak president. See, even CNN is losing faith since they didn't cover this story up. Obama's have measures have only emboldened Iran and Syria, and ignored their great leaps in technology. Clearly we need to elect Mitt Romney, who will no doubt respond to this devastating attack properly and Nuke those responsible. You were right all along FE, I must concede.
Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10950
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2012 at 7:57pm
Originally posted by evillepaintball evillepaintball wrote:


Its actually "AFRICOM"


nitpicker... And in my defense, my buddy who is usually sent to do things in areas of the dark continent where mines, hippos, ebola monkies, and 12-year-olds high on Khat and toting AKs are prevalent usually just calls AFRICOM "Those S.O.Bs" but without the abbreviation....

He's learned to like two things over there. Riverbeds (because the flash floods sweep away or detonate the AP mines) and the guys in the AC-130's that they try to have on standby. To quote him, "shooting your rifle is only acceptable when you can't put your target designater where you need to and tell those guys to make everything within a 40 yard radius die very violently." Needless to say, he's not to happy when he's over there.
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2012 at 6:37pm
FE's Idiotic, arm-chair quarterbacking, unpatriotic questions answered with new timeline. Now let's wait to see if FOX's "confidential source" wants to reveal himself so he can get the Bradley Manning treatment and the FOX reporters who didn't check their sources can get the Dan Rather treatment. 
Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2012 at 6:45pm
Originally posted by rednekk98 rednekk98 wrote:

FE's Idiotic, arm-chair quarterbacking, unpatriotic questions answered with new timeline. Now let's wait to see if FOX's "confidential source" wants to reveal himself so he can get the Bradley Manning treatment and the FOX reporters who didn't check their sources can get the Dan Rather treatment. 



So CNN's unnamed source > FOX's unnamed source? I'll consider them both to be full of **edited** until anyone offers up something with evidence.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2012 at 7:55pm
Generally I'd take a state department press release over an unnamed source who was supposedly there. Even if this source was in a position to know some of what was being requested, the department putting together a timeline of events has more access to different sources. Unless FOXs source is omniscient....oh, crap. FOX's source is Jesus, that's why they're always right about everything.

Sarcasm aside, I want more information and accountability. It's a fairly big deal, but so would bombing another sovereign nation with have diplomatic relations with. 
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2012 at 9:09pm
Well, Petraeus has come out... And pointed the finger RIGHT AT Obama...
 
 
Expect "journOlist" members to continue to spin in other directions... As there is an election to win.
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.281 seconds.