"Innocence of Muslims"
Quote: EvenBobMy accusation? Good lord, reports are pouring in from
all sides of this that it was planned months ago. Do
you even watch the news or read?
I have to, I can't tell what's actually going on from your posts usually.
Quote: rxwineI have to, I can't tell what's actually going on from your posts usually.
So you don't see Libya and Egypt claiming these
attacks have been planned for months to coincide
with 9/11? You think the riots are just a coincidence?
Quote: EvenBobSo you don't see Libya and Egypt claiming these
attacks have been planned for months to coincide
with 9/11? You think the riots are just a coincidence?
"Protests" might have been planned for months. But still hadn't heard that either. All I heard was a Egyptian cleric (or some religious dude) was riling people up on his local TV show with excerpts from that film.
When you gumshoes get the message sorted out with all the facts, I'll be waiting to hear it.
Quote: rxwine"Protests" might have been planned for months. But still hadn't heard that either. All I heard was a Egyptian cleric (or some religious dude) was riling people up on his local TV show with excerpts from that film.
When you gumshoes get the message sorted out with all the facts, I'll be waiting to hear it.
"It was planned, definitely. It was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago. And they were planning this criminal act since their arrival," Magariaf said.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/09/libyan-president-no-doubt-consulate-attack-preplanned-135664.html
I agree...there are still some facts that need to be sorted out but it seems as if there is at least some evidence that the attack was planned in advance. Perhaps a cleric used the movie to help drive the size of the crowds, etc. but the actual attack looks like it may have been the work of people who simply used the protest as cover for their actions. I don't think some random protesters just ran home and grabbed a couple of RPG's and decided to attack.
It is time that we pull our collective heads out of the sand and realize that there are those among the Muslims who would kill all of us if they could. I'm not advocating killing them all or anything of the sort--but shouldn't our leaders at least acknowledge that there is a problem that no one movie started and that continues not matter how much we try to appease the radicals?
We've allowed our intelligence work--the dirty work of gathering information on the ground to slip--and it is kicking our butts. We've got to protect our people in diplomatic missions across the world. I'm not saying that we have to always retaliate or always attack this enemy, but we sure have to understand that there is an enemy.
The scary thing is that Americans, at least those polled, think President Obama is better on foreign policy than a President Romney would be. If they are right, we are in a shit sandwich.
Quote: RonC"We've allowed our intelligence work--the dirty work of gathering information on the ground to slip--and it is kicking our butts. We've got to protect our people in diplomatic missions across the world. I'm not saying that we have to always retaliate or always attack this enemy, but we sure have to understand that there is an enemy.
As far as I know, we've acknowledged there are Islamic extremists since 9//11. We've been picking them off in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemin.
I think we're willing to go after them anywhere, but it would probably be pretty alarming to send a drone strike into Egypt. The governemnt is not very stable as it is.
Libya will probably be easier to operate in, but the situation there is still a government trying to establish control. If I remember, they had the least infra structure for government, it was all Kadafi not parliments, or anythng.
Quote: rxwineAs far as I know, we've acknowledged there are Islamic extremists since 9//11. We've been picking them off in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemin.
I think we're willing to go after them anywhere, but it would probably be pretty alarming to send a drone strike into Egypt. The governemnt is not very stable as it is.
Libya will probably be easier to operate in, but the situation there is still a government trying to establish control. If I remember, they had the least infra structure for government, it was all Kadafi not parliments, or anythng.
We have acknowledged them since 9/11 but we've also reduced our human intelligence capabilities over the past few years. Drones are great for taking pictures but they don't get inside the workings of the enemy. I guess that is the fundamental difference that I have with our current leadership--they should be considered an enemy because they seek to overthrow our way of life.
I'm not advocating attacking them anywhere they are but we do need to attack when it is feasible, work with local governments when necessary, and just keep our eyes open. I think that we have dropped the ball on keeping our eyes open to the threat.
President Obama's "play nice" idea sounded great but we still killed Bin Laden, which means we aren't really playing nice in their eyes. He should have realized that long ago--if he took it as a mission to kill Bin Laden, there is no way to keep the readical Muslims in line...
Quote: rxwine
I think we're willing to go after them anywhere, but it would probably be pretty alarming to send a drone strike into Egypt.
This could be the problem. Not that drones do not work, but they seem to be the only way this administration wants to do business. Same things were said after 9-11, our intel was reduced to a dependence on satellite images and electronic survalence. The art of infiltrating, using double agent-all of that was abandoned over the years as "too dangerous." Now drones seem to have replaced ecerything else in almost all cases (the Bin Ladden raid being one, too important to know he was dead to leave to a drone.)
Quote: EvenBobSo you don't see Libya and Egypt claiming these
attacks have been planned for months to coincide
with 9/11? You think the riots are just a coincidence?
I now think the tea party movement was organized months in advance, as there is little possibility all that was sparked by one guy's rant triggering the thing off.
It was some stock broker guy I think, but now I'm pretty sure anger was organized, just meant to look spontaneous.
See how that works.
Quote: rxwineI now think the tea party movement was organized months in advance, as there is little possibility all that was sparked by one guy's rant triggering the thing off.
It was some stock broker guy I think, but now I'm pretty sure anger was organized, just meant to look spontaneous.
See how that works.
So no sources you trust have mentioned anything about this possibly being pre-planned attack set to happen on 9/11?
Quote: RonCSo no sources you trust have mentioned anything about this possibly being pre-planned attack set to happen on 9/11?
The official govenrnment stance is "intell' wasn't there about the Libya attack. Intell sources may be wrong, may be proven to ignore information, but haven't seen anything yet.
Announcing we suspect it was planned if they officially have no official intel sources seems kind of like a bad idea.
1) Drone Strikes
2) The Israel Palestine conflict
3) American troops in foreign countries/
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/hidden-causes-of-the-muslim-protests/262440/
The article features a group of people protesting American occupation of "Muslim Land" (I did not know that land subscribed to a faith but whatever).
Nowhere does the article mention their hatred for freedom of speech, miniskirts, or any of the other nonsense that we are told feeds their hatred of America.
his family this winter. But now he stands before the burnt ruins of his modest home. The charred bodies of his loved ones still too hot
to hold one last time.
All because some Staff Sergeant typed in a wrong code and a Drone destroyed the wrong house halfway around the world. Where was that Staff Sargent a half-hour ago ? In a titty bar, watching a NFL game and drinking a beer !
Why should that Muslim hate Americans ? Does he not know it was just collateral damage ?
Quote: buzzpaffI have this thought far too often. One-half hour ago a man in Afghanistan is tending to his flock of goats. He is a good man, a family man. He has survived a tough time growing up. But at last he has a wife, children, and will not have to worry about feeding
his family this winter. But now he stands before the burnt ruins of his modest home. The charred bodies of his loved ones still too hot
to hold one last time.
All because some Staff Sergeant typed in a wrong code and a Drone destroyed the wrong house halfway around the world. Where was that Staff Sargent a half-hour ago ? In a titty bar, watching a NFL game and drinking a beer !
Why should that Muslim hate Americans ? Does he not know it was just collateral damage ?
That staff sergeant is one of "our heroes".
Quote: bigfoot66That staff sergeant is one of "our heroes".
Not my hero. Besides I learned in Vietnam, you can not win a war if you can not tell the enemy from your ally.
Afghan policeman is a friend, until he blows himself and our real heroes up.
Quote: buzzpaffNot my hero. Besides I learned in Vietnam, you can not win a war if you can not tell the enemy from your ally.
Afghan policeman is a friend, until he blows himself and our real heroes up.
And we make the same mistakes as in Vietnam, namely thinking you can do a "light" occupation and not take total control of everything while you change society completely to fix the problem. Look at post-WWII Germany and Japan. Total control was taken, everything run as we wanted to. No concern for hurt feelings---"you don't like being occupied, then don't start wars!" was the thought process. Little by little local control was returned. But from Day 1 the plan was it would take 5-10 years.
Afghanistan has been an 11 year series of planned-for-one-year occupations. We should have just declared the place a "colony" and maybe split it with the Brits for appearance sake, then built the backbone needed in government institutions. But no, this is the 21st century, can't be colonists anymore, no matter if the coloniozed are better off and the place is otherwise a terrorist swamp.
Not huddling over a Koran praying to imaginary god.
Afghanistan has nothing to offer the world except for heroin.
No effort was made to interdict the flow of heroin,
Because the US knows it is the only thing separating them from total ruin as a country.
Quote: WongBoJapan and Germany were committed to progressive modernization,
Not huddling over a Koran praying to imaginary god.
Afghanistan has nothing to offer the world except for heroin.
No effort was made to interdict the flow of heroin,
Because the US knows it is the only thing separating them from total ruin as a country.
I do hear that, but look at S Korea. They had nothing to offer, total basket case. Now world-leader in many things. Though they were a mess until the 1970s.
They were not committed to progressive modernization. They were just as committed to their respective ideologies, almost religions.
Lebensraum under the command of Der Liebe Führer and domination of aznlands with their God-Emperor.
Then both of these got broken and chance could begin. Having experience with technology and remnants of an industrial base helped. But it just helped speed up the process. In Afghan and Iraq, there is no process. All that happened was that semi-democratic Sunni islam got displaced by hardcore-authoritarian Shiite islam.
Destroy the religion, replace it with yours, and then you can be looking at progress.
To clarify, the real religion of the United States is Consumerism, not Xtianity. It doesn't matter if you call the bearded guy Arrahu or YHVH, it matters that you only call upon him to damn something and spend your prayer hours pleading with him for Nike Airs you're standing in line for not to run out.
Quote: rxwineThe official govenrnment stance is "intell' wasn't there about the Libya attack. Intell sources may be wrong, may be proven to ignore information, but haven't seen anything yet.
Announcing we suspect it was planned if they officially have no official intel sources seems kind of like a bad idea.
It appears the administration is starting to admit what they would before:
"The Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was in fact "a terrorist attack" and the U.S. government has indications that members of al Qaeda were directly involved, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday morning."
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/09/19/obama_official_benghazi_was_a_terrorist_attack
I understand that you don't want to run around accusing people of things they did not do, but I don't think there would have been any real harm in saying that we were investigating to see whether it was a planned or spontaneous event. My opinion is that the administration would rather have the whole thing blamed on a movie (not OUR fault in any way) rather than on a planned attack because that would bring in questions about their foreign policy.
On another note, it seems like president Obama is suddenly attending the briefings regularly:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/09/19/Exclusive-Obama-Reverses-Position-On-Intel-Briefs-Drops-iPad-For-Live-Meetings
I know some will have something to say about that source...oh well...find your own.
The point is that this President is detached from foreign policy/intel a lot more than I would like him to be. It usually isn't something incoming Presidents know a ton about, so we need them to really pay attention to it. By the way, I don't fault them for not knowing as much about it as other area; it just isn't something that every politician is heavily involved in. Some are, of course.
Quote: buzzpaffUSA biggest weapon has been our ability to bomb you back to the stone age. In Afghanistan , they are already there.
Just as big is the ability to lock a country out of the international system of trade. Without the ability to buy or sell goods you get very poor very fast. Or become dependent on China and Russia the way 1950s casino owners became dependent on mafia protection.
Quote: BBCHundreds of Libyan protesters have stormed the Benghazi headquarters of Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia in a backlash against last week's attack on the US consulate.
Quote: s2dbakerMuslims fight against the extremists in their midst.
Quote: BBCHundreds of Libyan protesters have stormed the Benghazi headquarters of Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia in a backlash against last week's attack on the US consulate.
In Iraq, it was assumed the majority of Iraqis would appreciate us getting rid of their dictator on the U.S. timeline. We decided it was necessary and did it. Unfortunately, far too many Iraqis didn't appreciate being bombed out of their complacency. Maybe 10 or 20 years things will finally smooth out.
In Libya, we backed a popular uprising at the right time. The Libyans own most of fighting and were enthusiastic about doing it. It's not surprising we can find more friends there.
Kosovo muslims became greatful to Bush and Clinton for the same reason, instead of resentful.
War is bad, but there's something to picking the right moment to intervene if you can do it.
Occupation rescues, like in WW2 were recent to the populations involved so they also welcomed their freedom from their recent nazi occupiers.
Quote: rxwine
In Iraq, it was assumed the majority of Iraqis would appreciate us getting rid of their dictator on the U.S. timeline. We decided it was necessary and did it. Unfortunately, far too many Iraqis didn't appreciate being bombed out of their complacency. Maybe 10 or 20 years things will finally smooth out.
The biggest mistake we make in the middle east is thinking that their attention span is as short as ours.
Quote: MonkeyMonkeyQuote: rxwine
In Iraq, it was assumed the majority of Iraqis would appreciate us getting rid of their dictator on the U.S. timeline. We decided it was necessary and did it. Unfortunately, far too many Iraqis didn't appreciate being bombed out of their complacency. Maybe 10 or 20 years things will finally smooth out.
The biggest mistake we make in the middle east is thinking that their attention span is as short as ours.
That and we always think they want to live and be like us.
Quote: rainmanThat and we always think they want to live and be like us.
I think it's more that we just can't conceive of them not wanting to live and be like us.
Of course the issue is more complex than just that, some of them do want to live and be like us, some of them hate that we're using up their oxygen.
Quote: rxwine
In Iraq, it was assumed the majority of Iraqis would appreciate us getting rid of their dictator on the U.S. timeline. We decided it was necessary and did it. Unfortunately, far too many Iraqis didn't appreciate being bombed out of their complacency. Maybe 10 or 20 years things will finally smooth out.
I must have been watching a different channel as I remember Iraqis partying in the streets, hitting Saddam posters in the face with shoes (big Arab insult) and cheering as th Saddam statue was pulled down. When things turned against us was when we didn't install a proper occupation--taking charge of everything is so WWII--and had the attitude of "we saved these people, why are we still over there? Baseball season doesn't last this long!" That and the attitude than *any* casualties are a reason to quit and pull out.
Bush failed when he was politically forced to say things would not take long. Any compotent General would have said, "this will take 10-20 years to fully straighten out, so lets build some bases and do it right." The US media and public, however, no longer have the deermination for such an effort.
Quote: MrVThe U.S. Ambassador in Libya was murdered.
All because of this ...
Innocence of Muslims
Hell of a way to commemorate the eleventh anniversary of 9-11.
That was the original story that came out but further investigation is peeling the onion and they have now figured out that it was a coordinated attack set for 9/11. The security around our ambassador was pitiful and he and the others paid the price for it.
Did the movie have an impact? It sure did. Muslims in other areas protested because of it and we continue to hear some in our government asking us to limit our free speech in order to appease the Muslims who act badly.
Our foreign policy is not working in the Muslim world--saying you are a nice person while using drones to kill people, including many innocents, does not work. Perhaps if we were just eliminating targets and there were no other casualties our only problem would be with the terrorists. When we hit innocents, that gets others hating us.
What foreign policy would work there? Ignoring them and letting them decide whether to live in the stone age or move forward? Giving them more aid with strings? Bombing them into oblivion? Nuanced relationships with groups that benefit them as their group benefits us?
Quote: AZDuffman
I must have been watching a different channel as I remember Iraqis partying in the streets, hitting Saddam posters in the face with shoes (big Arab insult) and cheering as th Saddam statue was pulled down.
The statue was stage managed by the U.S. Army who also pulled it down, and closely cropped video and photos made it look like the square was full of cheeing Iraqis, but the pulled-back image revealed a large swath of empty space with a small group of Iraqis and Americans in the center.
Eh, if you were an American walking in the streets in the previous ten years, you would have likely been greeted by bullet in the front or back of your head, assuming that you're wearing a vest. I assume it's gotten better, but you don't hear much of Iraq these days.
You need to stop watching bad news stations.
Also I'm reminded George Bush's Father is honored in Kuwait for its liberation -- real cheering there. And further, Kosovo and Libya, no American casualites in the liberation (the ambassador) you can count that I suppose),
Iraq far from it. George Bush Jrs failure. Someone threw a shoe at him years later.
