Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

I'm so tired of hearing about Benghazi

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   
So they got some of ours. Big deal. Is it a tragedy? Should I be mad that Americans got killed? Should I be upset that Team America (**** YEAH!) didn't show up to save the day-e-ay?

The answer to all those questions is NO.

We aren't the world police, yet we have armed occupation all over the globe. It's not shocking that eventually someone was gonna get upset somewhere.

Being part of foreign diplomacy or the security personnel to protect them automatically puts one at risk. This whole story is akin to a zoologist getting mauled by the very creatures he studies. Darwinism at its finest.

The lesson to be learned from this Benghazi situation is simple. GTFO of countries that aren't tremendous allies. If American lives are sacred, stop putting them in deadly situations.




posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
So they got some of ours. Big deal. Is it a tragedy?


The loss of any human life is a tragedy, the circumstances surrounding these deaths make it especially tragic. These men were left to die on the battlefield by an uncaring Commander in Chief. We don't leave our men to die.

I say everyone flag this thread, but don't star the OP to express our displeasure.
edit on 10/27/2012 by TTAA2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Wow, think how tired you would be if the rest of the MSM decided to actually cover the story.

Most of them are quiet about it.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   
What an a$$. You are no american! Men lost their lives there. If you dont want to hear about it, dont listen.
And with a name like Datroof, it doesnt surpise me you would start a thread like this. Go jump off a bridge!



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by damingus

And with a name like Datroof, it doesnt surpise me you would start a thread like this.



What's that supposed to mean?



Look, I'm not saying no one should cry when an American gets killed. What I'm saying is that I won't be the one crying, and I shouldn't be considered cold-hearted for not tearing up when a hired goon to protect a paid spy gets killed.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I agree with the OP - Star from me!

Then again... I am the big bad wolf


Cheer up OP, distract your self with my awesome music -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Failing that - Drag your arse to the pub


edit on 27-10-2012 by Sinny because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinny
 


Thanks Sinny!

I knew I'd get the flag wavers in here, but I'm more interested to see how many people aren't fooled, like you and I.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Things would be a lot easier if politicians were held accountable for certain crimes... The last 2 presidents should be sitting in 6 x 4 rooms. The deaths are tragic, but at some stage the world must move on.. Either charge the people responsible for letting it happen or simply let it go.
edit on 27-10-2012 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Things would be a lot easier if politicians were held accountable for certain crimes... The last 2 presidents should be sitting in 6 x 4 rooms.


Agreed.

10,000 percent.

They could be cellies. They deserve each other.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
reply to post by Sinny
 


Thanks Sinny!

I knew I'd get the flag wavers in here, but I'm more interested to see how many people aren't fooled, like you and I.



Well, alls fair in love and war apparently - So the consequences must faced - like it or not.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


This post of yours shows me you know nothing about the attacks & the USA/Libyan Gov't involment with said attacks. Da troof huh? I think not.

Don't like reading the news then continue to put your head into the sand.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by DaTroof
 


This post of yours shows me you know nothing about the attacks & the USA/Libyan Gov't involment with said attacks. Da troof huh? I think not.

Don't like reading the news then continue to put your head into the sand.


Oh trust me, I know all about it. Where would you like to start? When Qaddafi was still alive? How about the Arab Spring? Or perhaps you'd like to discuss the failed assassination attempt in 1986?



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


You're ranting about the attack but trying to show off that you know some kind of history? The important parts of the attack to know is the US govt let a terrorist attack occur on the 10 year anniversary of 9/11.

But who cares, right? You're sick of seeing new information about the attacks that continue to implicate the corrupt US govt in the attack by defending them saying they're not Team America World Police....

News flash, we are Team America World Police and they could have prevented that attack from happening. They also could have told the world the truth on that fateful day but they didn't & now their lies are catching up to them but you're sick of reading about it. Talk about ignorance.
edit on 27-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 



The history is important, since YOU brought it up. Also, the history is important to know just why Mr. Stevens was there. You started off like you wanted to have a discussion, and then when I offered to discuss real facts, you cower away and hide?



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


I never brought history up, you did, I brought up the attack, not Gadaffi or historical Libyan events. Of course Stevens was there for a reason... so whats your point? Also, by me responding to your thread I am having a discussion with you and that's how internet forums work. Would you like me to spoon fed you facts about the attack or do you already know them? You know what, if we're going to play the Fact Game why don't you go first and lay out all that you know about this attack (not Libyan history) then I will post all of the facts I know, then maybe once we're done you can realize it's very important to know what went down in Libya on September 11th and who let it happen.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by DaTroof
 


I never brought history up, you did, I brought up the attack, not Gadaffi or historical Libyan events. Of course Stevens was there for a reason... so whats your point? Also, by me responding to your thread I am having a discussion with you and that's how internet forums work. Would you like me to spoon fed you facts about the attack or do you already know them? You know what, if we're going to play the Fact Game why don't you go first and lay out all that you know about this attack (not Libyan history) then I will post all of the facts I know, then maybe once we're done you can realize it's very important to know what went down in Libya on September 11th and who let it happen.



This post of yours shows me you know nothing about the attacks & the USA/Libyan Gov't involment with said attacks.


USA/Libyan Government involvement requires the knowledge of history, particularly that involving Qaddafi and his opposition.

Stevens was there for a reason...Do you know what it was? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't to smile and shake hands. He was there to arm and fund Qaddafi opposition regardless of militant/religious extremism.

Now, as far as potential air support in the area being told to stand down, you don't just send out a squad to every report of gunfire in a war zone. Also, this attack came as a surprise, as there was no intelligence suggesting such an attack. Unprepared, undermanned forces will not survive a surprise attack. Want to point fingers? Point them at Mr. Stevens and the failed efforts of armed revolution.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Dance around this issue all you want I did not bring up history. The newly formed Libya Gov't is a result of the NATO led civil war of 2011, so because it happened last year it's technically history but only you are bringing up Gadaffi and the 1980s, who both have nothing to do with these attacks....

So that's all of you facts? Stevens was there to fund Gadaffi forces? Funny, I've read conspiracies he was there to fund Al Qaeda but I propose to you to post ALL of the FACTs you think you know, sources included. So far you fail to provide.

So take your time, compile your facts, your opinions, and I'll be back later today to review your progress.
edit on 27-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by DaTroof
 


I never brought history up, you did, I brought up the attack, not Gadaffi or historical Libyan events. Of course Stevens was there for a reason... so whats your point? Also, by me responding to your thread I am having a discussion with you and that's how internet forums work. Would you like me to spoon fed you facts about the attack or do you already know them? You know what, if we're going to play the Fact Game why don't you go first and lay out all that you know about this attack (not Libyan history) then I will post all of the facts I know, then maybe once we're done you can realize it's very important to know what went down in Libya on September 11th and who let it happen.



This post of yours shows me you know nothing about the attacks & the USA/Libyan Gov't involment with said attacks.


USA/Libyan Government involvement requires the knowledge of history, particularly that involving Qaddafi and his opposition.

Stevens was there for a reason...Do you know what it was? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't to smile and shake hands. He was there to arm and fund Qaddafi opposition regardless of militant/religious extremism.

Now, as far as potential air support in the area being told to stand down, you don't just send out a squad to every report of gunfire in a war zone. Also, this attack came as a surprise, as there was no intelligence suggesting such an attack. Unprepared, undermanned forces will not survive a surprise attack. Want to point fingers? Point them at Mr. Stevens and the failed efforts of armed revolution.


Really? You throw Stevens under the bus to protect Obama? Who do you think PUT him there?



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
There is only one group talking about Benghazi, that is the Right Wing media (Fox, Limbaugh, Beck).

Fortunately, the only idiots that listen to these morons are people who already think Obama is a Muslim.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Dance around this issue all you want I did not bring up history. The newly formed Libya Gov't is a result of the NATO led civil war of 2011, so because it happened last year it's technically history but only you are bringing up Gadaffi and the 1980s, who both have nothing to do with these attacks....

So that's all of you facts? Stevens was there to fund Gadaffi forces? Funny, I've read conspiracies he was there to fund Al Qaeda but I propose to you to post ALL of the FACTs you think you know, sources included. So far you fail to provide.

So take your time, compile your facts, your opinions, and I'll be back later today to review your progress.
edit on 27-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



Slow down and read again. Stevens was there to fund OPPOSITION, meaning "Al Qaeda".

Qaddafi's influence has EVERYTHING to do with how this situation resolved.

Stevens made promises to opposition forces about money, power, land, resources... When things didn't go as planned, and there were too many splinter groups being promised too much, action was taken to eliminate Stevens.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join