Comments about ‘Letters: Claim Benghazi, Obama’

There were several attacks on U.S. embassies during the administration of George Bush Jr., resulting in over 50 American deaths. It is my guess that the author of this letter never once called on Bush to be held accountable for these deaths.

Joyce, 3 things:

1. If you voted for George W. Bush, you have lost the right to trash another president for putting American lives at risk. Period. Over 3000 soldiers dead in a voluntary war promoted on lies. A whole generation of Republicans have lost all moral high ground, and I don't care if they think that is ancient history. They elected a republican president who lied to start a war. And then they re-elected him.

2. If you think Obama is directly responsible for a security breach that left 4 dead in an embassy, what does that say about 9/11?

3. Republicans in Congress have voted to cut security spending in foreign embassies since 2010. Why aren't you blaming them? If Obama had somehow strong-armed more security spending and an attack hadn't happened, you would be complaining about runaway spending.

And the execution of Osama bin Laden? Joyce, you're just jealous it didn't happen under a Republican administration.

I recall the tremendous emotion with which Obama rebuffed Romney's attempt to engage him on the topic of Benghazi during the presidential debates. It now appears that that degree of outrage was only for show and not for those responsible for what happened - seems a bit misplaced.

I'd be willing to place a $10,000 "Romney bet" that the author of this letter never once questioned the leadership of the Disastrous Bushco Ring of Frauds and Thieves...Cheney, Rummy, Rove, and Ashcroft et. al......What's the death toll from the disasters and fiascos caused by Utah's Favorite Sons?

Benghazi was a minor incident compared with what Republicans caused.

Joyce - what would you like... what would make you satisfied that justice has been carried out?

Should a President be personally responsible for military personal that abuse prisoners?

Should the President be responsible for military that relieve themselves on the dead opponents?

Is he personally responsible for the failures of each action where the military fails?

Should the President be personally responsible for actions by terrorist on our own soil, that kill thousands?

What is the right level of accountability, is 4 people more serious than 2,000 in New York City?

I don't know... you feel there is some lack of justice, that the President has gotten off easy.

Just last year a US soldier left base and killed 16 villagers, unarmed, women and children, then burnt their remains. An act as equally vile or more so than what happened in Libya. Is this President, or any president, totally responsible for military failures on foreign lands?

Lets separate media hype versus the real world. Libya was sad, but much worse has happened, and Libya pails in comparison.

Congressional hearings are ongoing and no one has escaped blame for the attacks on Benghazi, unlike, say, the attacks in Karachi, Pakistan (3 times); Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Taskkent, Uzbekistan; Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Damascus, Syria; Athens, Greece; Istanbul, Turkey; Sana'a, Yemen (2 times); all between 2001 and 2006.

And regarding the capture and killing of bin Laden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has told 60 Minutes that President Obama's decision to launch a raid against Osama Bin Laden's compound with ground troops was “one of the most courageous” decisions he has ever seen a president make.
Gates adds “Frankly, my heart was in my mouth... There was a lot of uncertainty about whether he was there. This was a very risky operation. So, I was very concerned. So was the President… I worked for a lot of these guys and this is one of the most courageous calls - decisions - that I think I've ever seen a president make.”

Gates cites the uncertainty of the intelligence and the potential consequences if the mission failed as reinforcing his view of Obama's courage in making the call.

Yes the Bush presidency endured many attacks abroad. But how is that Bush's fault? He can't control what the militants and terrorists do?

What he can do is make sure that places we have diplomatic people also have reasonable protection so the attacks could be driven off.

No ambassadors were killed under Bush.

No ambassadors were tortured, raped, nor were their bodies dragged through the streets.

He never blamed an American video for the attacks.

He never lied about the attacks.

There were never calls for help that fell on deaf presidential ears, for 7 hours.

Diplomatic personnel were not left to fend for themselves in dangerous countries just to make the president look successful.

All that was Obama, not Bush.

Obama will never take responsibility for anything in his presidency, except getting Bin Laden. Bush would have order the hit too, so what's so great about that.?

All the other stuff,
"I will turn this economy around in a year" but he didn't,
leaving an ambassador vulnerable, who paid with his life, to make Obama's foreign policy look good,
6 trillion in debt,
class warfare

He will never own up, nor will the 49.6% who worship him.

Wow, are you behind! Even Fox News no longer cares about Benghazi. Its 2013 and your current target of outrage is supposed to be Al Gore selling Current TV to Al Jazeera.

This writer is completely forgetting that our own Jason Chafetz has boasted that he voted NO on increased funding for American embassies.

Since the Benghazi attack, however, Jason has stopped boasting about that has found other things to try to fool us with.

This horse has died. You should have had another assigned to you by talk radio by now.

House Foreign Affairs Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen said, "Budgetary constraints were not a factor in the department's failure to recognize threats and adequately respond to the situation in Benghazi." Others who testified before the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee concurred. (It wasn't Jason Chaffetz's fault.)

Not only did Jason Chaffetz claim reponsibility for cutting funding for security, he and other Republicans, during a televised hearing, exposed the secret CIA outpost in Benghazi.

Re:Christian24-7

Though common sense calls for simply ignoring your post, i'll just say your comment is pure nonsense.

Re:Pops

(Of course, you are quoting Republican House chairwoman).

On the other hand,

The panel tasked to investigate Benghazi findings stated::

"The solution requires a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs, which, in total, constitute a small percentage both of the full national budget and that spent for national security. One overall conclusion in this report is that Congress must do its part to meet this challenge and provide necessary resources to the State Department to address security risks and meet mission imperatives."

Re:Pops

Of course you would choose to quote the Republican House Chairwoman.

On the other hand, the panel which investigated Benghazi stated:

"The solution requires a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs, which, in total, constitute a small percentage both of the full national budget and that spent for national security. One overall conclusion in this report is that Congress must do its part to meet this challenge and provide necessary resources to the State Department to address security risks and meet mission imperatives."

"I am ultimately responsible for what's taking place there because these are my folks, and I'm the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home," Obama said during the october 12 debate with Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney in New York.

"These are not just representatives of the United States, they are my representatives. I send them there, often times into harms way," Obama said.

"Ultimately as Commander-in-Chief I am responsible and I don’t shy away from that responsibility," Obama stated on MSNBC interview october 28, 2012

“President Obama takes responsibility for the safety and security of all diplomats serving overseas,” said Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki during a Fox News interview october 12, 2012

Pops,
You mean Florida Republican representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who has used hyperbolic language and is a darling in Fox News interviews? Sorry, not a reliable source of unbiased information.

Christian,
"He can't control what the militants and terrorists do?"

Yeah, exactly. Lost in your own irony yet?

"He never lied about the attacks."

Nope. Lied about a war that killed thousands instead. Somehow that's better in your eyes?

"No ambassadors were killed under Bush."

Well, then, no harm no foul. If I were an American serviceman, I think I would take strident exception to the fact that apparently their lives don't matter to you. It's OK that we lost 3000 of them because no ambassadors were in the tally.

How do we explain to our children that Obama lied to us when he told us that a "film" caused the deaths of those killed in Benghazi? How do we explain to our children that Obama "blamed" Hillery Clinton and Susan Rice for the lies about Benghazi? How do we explain the President's acts of cowardice to our children?

We hold up other Presidents as role models to our children, but we will never be able to hold Obama as an example for anything noble or good until he stops lying, until he stops blaming others for his failures, until he stops expecting his community organizers to deflect and divert public attention from DEATHS that he allowed by his inaction. Yes, those people may have died anyway, but at least they would have known and we would have known that the Commander in Chief acted to save their lives.

He just doesn't care. Those who defend him just don't care. He wants to sweep it under the rug. They want to sweep it under the rug.

Those killed were AMERICANS who deserved better from the Commander in Chief.

Mike Richards,
"How do we explain to our children..."

You're joking, right? You honestly expect me to believe that you talk about international politics with little kids? Or that they somehow came running to you for comfort, asking why oh why the president "lied" about Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice? You're a funny man, Mr. Richards, if I didn't know your political stance better I'd say your last post was well-played satire.

Personally, I would be too busy trying to explain to my children why it is I voted for a president who lied about getting us into a war that killed nearly 1000 times the number of AMERICANS killed in Benghazi. That's not even counting civilians. That would keep me busy for awhile.

"We hold up other Presidents as role models to our children"

Who, exactly? Especially, who recently? Find me a president who hasn't lied, exercised poor judgement, played partisan politics, cost us unnecessary lives, etc. Then tell me why it is you've zeroed in on this one. Certainly not the worse offender we've had.