|
Please don't use this thread as a platform to argue about religion. -semioldguy |
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post.
|
On September 14 2012 04:36 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 04:15 DannyJ wrote:On September 14 2012 04:05 s3rp wrote:On September 14 2012 03:51 ranshaked wrote:
Time to take all Americans out of the middle east, cut trade with them, stop funding them, and bring our troops home!
You can't reason with radical Islamists. It's a pity that the innocents are stuck in the middle. Have fun without any oil from the middle east. Your own resources are not nearly suffiecient enough to withstand the demand even if you started drilling everywhere possible. Gas prices would explode in the US and not just those. Hell with the oil companies/republicans basically blocking/ignoring renewable enegy development you'll even get problems with your energy management. the US gets around 15% of it's oil from the middle East, almost all of it from Saudi Arabia. Thats still a substantial amount that would not be so easy to replace without major increases in gas/oil prices.
I heard the US actually has quite substantial untapped Oil reserves so I doubt any long term increase would occur except if its politically motivated. Sure for a while there might be an increase in price, but we do get the majority of our oil from Canada after all and if we actually set up and started drilling our own resources more we wouldn't need to import any oil at all. No one wants to increase drilling on our home soil however.
|
On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post.
Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA.
If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better?
I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly.
|
On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly.
40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act, not to mention the size difference between an embassy and a country).
|
On September 14 2012 06:59 Zahir wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 06:16 neversummer wrote:On September 14 2012 06:02 s3rp wrote:On September 14 2012 05:41 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 04:49 Brindled wrote:On September 14 2012 04:48 FlilFlam wrote:
This video scares me...
This thread scares me...
This planet scares me...
As an atheist I do however find it darkly amusing that the overboiling pot of religious hatred from all sides is going to fulfill their own prophecies and fuck up the world's people beyond reasonable repair when the very point and stated purpose of a religious instiutions is to "save the world and its people, and generally make it a better, happier, place".
RIP to the victims...
Violence, murder and general harm are abhorrent in all forms outside the narrowest limits of self defense.
The world grows darker... Friend, I think you should look at my post above. The pictures in my news links may make you smile. Can you explain to me how those people, and those who fly planes into buildings, and kill innocent people just because they're American and someone in America made a film about their religion, both get their faith from the same exact book? Those same people in the pictures you posted are against free speech. The women are covered up, and they would not like it if you drew a picture of their prophet. They won't kill you (like the "extremists" do) but they still are not in touch with the 21st century and the implied rights that it comes with in a large majority of nations around the world. Islam in its current form is not viable in the 21st century. edit: I hope this doesn't go against the note at the top of the thread, but I don't see how this isn't a religious discussion when the intent is entirely religious. Please just erase my post if this goes against it. They don't get their views/faith from the same book. All of the extrememists get their views from radical "clerks" that interpret scripture written over a millenium ago in way that is not appropriate anymore. These are the kind people that radicalize others to widen their own influence. Extremism in general is wrong and produces nutjob foundamentalists. This is pretty much spot on, although every Muslim gains some knowledge from the Qur'an, extremist or not. I can't think for the life of me the arabic word for the "clerks" you're referring to; these people do, in fact, interpret words from an ancient time and try to appropriate them, which in most cases devolves into literal interpretations due to the fact that Islamic extremism is primarily a conservative movement, to a modern context. Everyone in this thread needs to acknowledge these terrorist acts are caused by ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS and not Muslims as a whole. By generalizing them you are no greater than the people who senselessly bash Americans for being fat and uneducated. Well said. Condemning Islam and classifying it as "not viable in the 21st century" over the actions of a minority of extremists is like condemning Christianity due to the actions of the KKK.
It's not extremist to be against freedom of speech and to cover the women. You guys take so much shit out of context it's disgusting.
|
On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act, not to mention the size difference between an embassy and a country).
We don't need armed troops all over because we are not a bunch of loonies that go around and shot ambassadors and bomb embassies.
|
On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act).
What can a governement do with 1 year of power after a dictatorship, no more industrial infrastures, no more administration, no more police and many war guns out of control? Control the troops? Pick up the bests of the bests in the middle of many unknown guys?
They do what they can, and they can't do much.
|
On September 14 2012 07:39 Jisall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act, not to mention the size difference between an embassy and a country). We don't need armed troops all over because we are not a bunch of loonies that go around and shot ambassadors and bomb embassies.
Look at the context...they were Libyan troops, not US. This is why I am complaining, because now we have even more troops in the country, at our tripolli embassy, so that this doesn't happen again. And they will leikly be there a very long time, along with the naval destroyers.
|
On September 14 2012 07:39 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act). What can a governement do with 1 year of power after a dictatorship, no more industrial infrastures, no more administration, no more police and many war guns out of control? Control the troops? Pick up the bests of the bests in the middle of many unknown guys? They do what they can, and they can't do much.
What? I said that they had 40 troops there to help protect our ambassador...but they didn't do that.
|
On September 14 2012 07:39 Jisall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act, not to mention the size difference between an embassy and a country). We don't need armed troops all over because we are not a bunch of loonies that go around and shot ambassadors and bomb embassies.
You have the power to change things btw. It's illegal. But it's possible. It's the same for Lybia, except they don't have the administration and the money to do better than any other country in the world, the richer one included.
|
On September 14 2012 07:43 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:39 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act). What can a governement do with 1 year of power after a dictatorship, no more industrial infrastures, no more administration, no more police and many war guns out of control? Control the troops? Pick up the bests of the bests in the middle of many unknown guys? They do what they can, and they can't do much. What? I said that they had 40 troops there to help protect our ambassador...but they didn't do that.
And I said about Government in Lybia : "They do what they can, and they can't do much."
Self quotes are cool, but..you know...
|
I saw this on the news tonight - basically the whole midde east is in an uproar in an anti US riot (they called it protests).
I would not want to be a western tourist in any Islam majority country right now - its out of control, and the nations cannot reign in these people.
|
On September 14 2012 07:53 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:43 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:39 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. K 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act). What can a governement do with 1 year of power after a dictatorship, no more industrial infrastures, no more administration, no more police and many war guns out of control? Control the troops? Pick up the bests of the bests in the middle of many unknown guys? They do what they can, and they can't do much. What? I said that they had 40 troops there to help protect our ambassador...but they didn't do that. And I said about Government in Lybia : "They do what they can, and they can't do much." Self quotes are cool, but..you know...
More like they gave the victims to the terrorists instead of trying to do their jobs, and those shitbags will NEVER be punished for it.
|
On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly.
It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right?
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right?
We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita.
|
On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right?
It's the same indeed. I've no problem to say that European nations, France included, aint able to protect their citizen even they are rich enough to do so, nor control their own troops.
And if they can't, how Lybia's governement could?
|
On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita.
The higher incarceration rate is pretty much entirely because of the ridiculous war on drugs.
The higher homicide rate does not come from mass shooting sprees like many people outside the US seem to think, those are quite rare and happen in other countries about as often when you take population into account. It almost exclusively comes from street gang on street gang violence.
|
On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita.
Who cares? It is irrelevant to the OP. Let's not get on a tangent. Protecting an embassy is not comparable to preventing civilians from murdering each other. No one has asked Libya to reach beyond their means. They had men there, and those men were allegedly "indignant" that a movie was made. That is why the OP as well as I am angry. The Libyan government is angry that America "allowed" an anti-Muslim movie to be made. A low budget film is the justification for violence on innocents from terrorists, inaction from supposed allies, and then blame for the entire event is placed on America?
|
On September 14 2012 07:58 GARO wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:53 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:43 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:39 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:30 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. K 40+ troops were stationed there and they walked away...is that not the gov'ts fault? for not doing their job (helping protect our ambassador) which three of our troops did die for....and yes, when we are on guard with naval ships nearby they can most certainly ensure protection at our tripolli embassy...we don't have armed troops all over in the US (on guard and ready to act). What can a governement do with 1 year of power after a dictatorship, no more industrial infrastures, no more administration, no more police and many war guns out of control? Control the troops? Pick up the bests of the bests in the middle of many unknown guys? They do what they can, and they can't do much. What? I said that they had 40 troops there to help protect our ambassador...but they didn't do that. And I said about Government in Lybia : "They do what they can, and they can't do much." Self quotes are cool, but..you know... More like they gave the victims to the terrorists instead of trying to do their jobs, and those shitbags will NEVER be punished for it.
The government said that they will purchase the killer. Let see. I'm not optimistic that the killers will be judged and punished, but "They do what they can, and they can't do much.".
I'm sorry to repeat, but you must take the contexte into consideration.
|
On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post.
I completely agree with this sentiment, although where did it say in the articles that their defense leaders stated it was our fault for allowing the video to be released?
Anyway I'm not convinced by Obama's reaction that there will be a strong military response, although they are sending two destroyers into the Mediterannean. To me this is nothing more than a display of force- I mean why would you be sending tomahawk missiles from hundreds of miles away (the accuracy of which are obviously suspect) when you can literally be dropping hellfire missiles from less than five hundred yards away with a fucking badass UAV. I also read they're planning on reallocating some of the other drones from local combat zones to increase their targeting potential and overall badass-edness.
Here's the problem. I agree the Libyan government looks VERY suspect in this scenario, due to both what you've already stated and something I found shocking in one of the articles: The commander of Libya's special operations unit that was on escort for the 8-man American rescue party stated, "It was supposed to be a secret place and we were surprised the armed groups knew about it,' Sharif said of the safe house."
I mean this is just ridiculous. What kind of halfassed operation are you running when your safehouse is discovered by the Islamic extremists you're aiming to prevent? And somewhere else in the article it stated the Libyan armed forces didn't react properly because they could "sympathize" with the religious intolerance. I think it also goes without saying that the fact this occurred on 9/11 raises some suspicions by itself.
On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly.
Honestly take this nationalist shit somewhere where someone actually gives a damn. I hear there's a Quebec secession thread with your name all over it.
And no, it's not silly. 2 of our diplomats died, and at least 2 additional Americans died in the ensuing rescue effort.
And I said about Government in Lybia : "They do what they can, and they can't do much."
Self quotes are cool, but..you know...
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Tough Guy. Pleasure to meet you, sir.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
