US ambassador 'killed in Libya'. US consulate Benghazi stormed. 4 US officials "dead"

[steveox]

You know that will never happen ...
Obama is more likely to give the order for those ships to fire on Israel when they attack Iran than to fire on Libya.

http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/9/13/marines_warships_sent_to_libya.htm

 

[RoccoR]

strongservice, et al,

Well, I think this sounds patriotic and true, but I don't thinks it is accurate.

The recent attacks on our embassies in Libya, Yemen, and Egypt are a sobering example of how 9/11 will continue to affect our country decades after the original 9/11 in 2001. That tragedy tore our Nation apart while simultaneously it also brought us together in one united resolve to combat terrorism at its source; no matter where it hides or in what country.

(COMMENT)

We know, from previous experiences, that when we (America) depict a Prophet like Mohammad in an unfavorable light, that it will trigger an resentful reaction from the communities which are Muslim Heavy.

• The attack in Sanaa (Yemen), on the Embassy, is nothing more than a response because we are there - at hand and available. It has nothing to do with general terrorism or specifically 911.
• The attack in Benghazi (Libya) was a 911 Remembrance attack, but by a extremist group that was already anti-American. They are protesting and opposing US foreign Policy in the Region and US interference.
• The Cairo (Egypt) attack is again, a reaction by a reactionary muslim element over the portrayal of Mohammad.

The US needs to adjust its foreign policy in the region and back away all aid and assistance to the ungrateful and barbaric muslim nations that see the American presence as detrimental. Such a policy adjustment and its implementation will improve US security, and actually reduce our ineffective practice of trying to buy allies and friends. It will save us money.

But don't think, for a moment, that these are associated al-Qaeda style terrorism. What they have in common is that they have a similar perception of the US. And that perception fuels the anti-American activity that haunts the US in the region.

Most Respectfully
R

 

[strongservice]

strongservice, et al,

Well, I think this sounds patriotic and true, but I don't thinks it is accurate.


(COMMENT)

We know, from previous experiences, that when we (America) depict a Prophet like Mohammad in an unfavorable light, that it will trigger an resentful reaction from the communities which are Muslim Heavy.

• The attack in Sanaa (Yemen), on the Embassy, is nothing more than a response because we are there - at hand and available. It has nothing to do with general terrorism or specifically 911.
• The attack in Benghazi (Libya) was a 911 Remembrance attack, but by a extremist group that was already anti-American. They are protesting and opposing US foreign Policy in the Region and US interference.
• The Cairo (Egypt) attack is again, a reaction by a reactionary muslim element over the portrayal of Mohammad.

The US needs to adjust its foreign policy in the region and back away all aid and assistance to the ungrateful and barbaric muslim nations that see the American presence as detrimental. Such a policy adjustment and its implementation will improve US security, and actually reduce our ineffective practice of trying to buy allies and friends. It will save us money.

But don't think, for a moment, that these are associated al-Qaeda style terrorism. What they have in common is that they have a similar perception of the US. And that perception fuels the anti-American activity that haunts the US in the region.

Most Respectfully
R

Wow, very well said, you won't find any argument here. I have somewhat changed my view of the strife in the Middle east before 9/11, 2012 to Why should we help people today who might try to kill us tomorrow, that may sound like a cold hearted view to some , but I hope it sounds like common sense to others; especially who ever is going to be in charge of America next year. Did you read the rest of my article on my blog link at the bottom of the post?--Anyway, thank you for responding, I really appreciate your opinion- Brian

 

[dogtowner]

strongservice, et al,

Well, I think this sounds patriotic and true, but I don't thinks it is accurate.


(COMMENT)

We know, from previous experiences, that when we (America) depict a Prophet like Mohammad in an unfavorable light, that it will trigger an resentful reaction from the communities which are Muslim Heavy.

• The attack in Sanaa (Yemen), on the Embassy, is nothing more than a response because we are there - at hand and available. It has nothing to do with general terrorism or specifically 911.
• The attack in Benghazi (Libya) was a 911 Remembrance attack, but by a extremist group that was already anti-American. They are protesting and opposing US foreign Policy in the Region and US interference.
• The Cairo (Egypt) attack is again, a reaction by a reactionary muslim element over the portrayal of Mohammad.

The US needs to adjust its foreign policy in the region and back away all aid and assistance to the ungrateful and barbaric muslim nations that see the American presence as detrimental. Such a policy adjustment and its implementation will improve US security, and actually reduce our ineffective practice of trying to buy allies and friends. It will save us money.

But don't think, for a moment, that these are associated al-Qaeda style terrorism. What they have in common is that they have a similar perception of the US. And that perception fuels the anti-American activity that haunts the US in the region.

Most Respectfully
R

seems the Al-Q flag was run up over an embassy AND Libya sasys it was Al-Q.
Not really convinced you got it right.

 

[Aus22]

The attacks on Us Diplomatic buildings have reached Sydney. Several police were injured. The Islamic Council has condemned the violence.

 

[BigRob]

strongservice, et al,

Well, I think this sounds patriotic and true, but I don't thinks it is accurate.


(COMMENT)

We know, from previous experiences, that when we (America) depict a Prophet like Mohammad in an unfavorable light, that it will trigger an resentful reaction from the communities which are Muslim Heavy.

• The attack in Sanaa (Yemen), on the Embassy, is nothing more than a response because we are there - at hand and available. It has nothing to do with general terrorism or specifically 911.
• The attack in Benghazi (Libya) was a 911 Remembrance attack, but by a extremist group that was already anti-American. They are protesting and opposing US foreign Policy in the Region and US interference.
• The Cairo (Egypt) attack is again, a reaction by a reactionary muslim element over the portrayal of Mohammad.

The US needs to adjust its foreign policy in the region and back away all aid and assistance to the ungrateful and barbaric muslim nations that see the American presence as detrimental. Such a policy adjustment and its implementation will improve US security, and actually reduce our ineffective practice of trying to buy allies and friends. It will save us money.

But don't think, for a moment, that these are associated al-Qaeda style terrorism. What they have in common is that they have a similar perception of the US. And that perception fuels the anti-American activity that haunts the US in the region.

Most Respectfully
R

We do need to adjust our foreign policy, but not by backing away on aid. Pulling back aid will not have the end result you envision in my view, and I would argue that the majority of these countries are still relatively pro-US, and these are acts by fringe elements.

 

[dogtowner]

We do need to adjust our foreign policy, but not by backing away on aid. Pulling back aid will not have the end result you envision in my view, and I would argue that the majority of these countries are still relatively pro-US, and these are acts by fringe elements.

its because they cannot keep their jobs (or lives most likely) without our cash that they will respond quickly and decisively. that my take.

 

[strongservice]

seems the Al-Q flag was run up over an embassy AND Libya sasys it was Al-Q.
Not really convinced you got it right.

well, If we didn't believe in stuff most people don't, we would not be labeled liberals. LOL--Thanks brian

 

[Texas_tea]

The attacks on Us Diplomatic buildings have reached Sydney. Several police were injured. The Islamic Council has condemned the violence.

That appeasement should fix it ...

 

[dogtowner]

well, If we didn't believe in stuff most people don't, we would not be labeled liberals. LOL--Thanks brian

excellent way to describe it.

 

[Texas_tea]

We do need to adjust our foreign policy, but not by backing away on aid. Pulling back aid will not have the end result you envision in my view, and I would argue that the majority of these countries are still relatively pro-US, and these are acts by fringe elements.

The German people did not bring about the Holocaust ... the fringe element did! Pro-US or not .... the results will only end in the result they envision .... how did that appeasement work out in 1936?

We absolutely need to adjust our foreign policies ... this is not going away, take a page from history !!!!

 

[Texas_tea]

well, If we didn't believe in stuff most people don't, we would not be labeled liberals. LOL--Thanks brian

Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.
-Ronald Reagan

 

[BigRob]

The German people did not bring about the Holocaust ... the fringe element did! Pro-US or not .... the results will only end in the result they envision .... how did that appeasement work out in 1936?

We absolutely need to adjust our foreign policies ... this is not going away, take a page from history !!!!

In what world did anyone call for appeasement?

Can we not work with a relatively friendly government and still violently eradicate those responsible for these actions?

 

[Texas_tea]

In what world did anyone call for appeasement?

Can we not work with a relatively friendly government and still violently eradicate those responsible for these actions?

No .... there is no difference between their "relatively friendly government" and violence!

This is not a police issue! That is liberal *********. This is war that will bring about violence, despite the best of diplomatic efforts!

 

[dogtowner]

In what world did anyone call for appeasement?

Can we not work with a relatively friendly government and still violently eradicate those responsible for these actions?

we have had some degree of success working with islamist states when there have been a) significant monetary reasons (oil) b) a heavy hand by the govt on the religious leadership (Turkey) c) basically no relationship at all due to their economic isolation (all those states in the south of what was USSR).

cant eradicate without some sense of cooperation and they are not good about that.