Benghazi scandal tied to White House
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Lol, it's not news, it is commentary.
Like Fox "News" or Sun "News".
As you seem to agree, sometimes these commentators have good points.
Moral relativism is many things. It is indeed a point of reference. It is also a characteristic of a lack of confidence in what one purports to believe, and of a lack of belief in the certainty of virtue.
Probably for the same reason the leftist anti-war movement in the US was vehement concerning Iraq and silent regarding Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan.
I can think of many reasons to account for the question you pose, not all of which are mutually exclusive. Cynicism is one such reason. So is partisan advantage. But for me the most telling reason to fixate on Benghazi is because of the experience of Iraq. Both Libya and Iraq were colossal blunders in the conduct of foreign policy and national security policy. The common theme between the two is the ejection of the United States from the greater Middle East. In the judgment of history it will be seen that Obama and Bush had much in common.
Sounds fancy but ultimately meaningless.
I never referred to Iraq in order to make any comment on the morality of either situation. I referred to the reaction to Iraq from the same people who are reacting strongly to Benghazi.
Afghanistan was a much easier sell because of the links between the Taliban and al-Qaeda and the broad international support for the mission. The rationale for invading Iraq was never widely accepted, and turned out to be patently false.
Well, yeah, two leaders at the helm of the same ship can only do so much differently.
It is hard to really compare Libya and Iraq. They were so drastically different in every way. In Libya again, they had broad international support. It only lasted a matter of months, and it didn't result in any US casualties. Putting that on the same level as a war that consumed America for 9 years, 4500 American lives, well over 100k Iraqi lives, and trillions of dollars.
Iraq is a war that will really define US foreign policy for decades to come.
Let me explain something to you.
I'll use little words, so you have some remote chance of understanding:
There is a reality outside the parameters of the "progressive" mantra. In fact, most of reality exists outside the parameters of the "progressive" world view.
There is, in an adult's world, room for a wide spectrum of ideas, of belief, of world view..........and the contemplation and the comparison oft these varying truths are helpful in defining the stances one should take in dealing with the world at large.
When someone tells you the debate is over, when one disregards a world view without ever considering it, simply because they are told it is not within the mantra, that would indicate that their intellectual development is stunted, and that they lack the capacity to deal with any idea outside of their own narrow-minded tunnel vision of the world, and desperately seek some being, some entity, some institution to tell them how to think. Often this is focused on a personality, a set political philosophy, or a respected institution....
Oh.
I said I'd make it easy, didn't I??
You are a fool.
I would think that you are a fool for typing all of that when it doesn't remotely apply to this situation.
I posted the video because the videos in Tecumsehsbones' link don't work in Canada.
Obviously I agree with his views for the most part, but I certainly would never reference a commentator such as him as proof of my points.
That said, people like Jon Stewart are no different than Ezra Levant, Bill O'Reilly, or any or the other commentators. They express their opinions about news events and play to their audience. Just because Jon makes jokes about something doesn't mean that those things are a joke. Just because he expresses an opinion about something doesn't make that opinion a joke. On the same level, just because someone does express an opinion about something, it isn't automatically a valid opinion. There are things that are right and wrong in this world.
We are all more than capable of looking at the facts behind the opinions that these people express and making up our own mind.
Comedy Central is the main news source for the libs... followed by msnbc.
Yes we've not seen them around for sometime now have we? They took an 8 year hiatus during the Clinton years as well.
It helps when you're a Democrat period.
unilateral: Involving only one group or country.
Invasion of Iraq 2003 Coalition Forces...
US
UK
Australia
Poland
You double FAIL
You don't even get it.
Ah....I wasn't discounting Steward's views....he does not even pretend to be real. I have no problem with him.
I was berating you for disregarding and belittling serious views that are not part of the mantra.
Sun News and Fox News are valuable because they present views untouched by CBC, NBC, CNN etc.............
Morality, immorality, and amoralism are never meaningless. They always inform opinion.
You were seeking to characterize a group of people by suggesting hypocrisy. Isn't that a moral judgment?
Afghanistan was an easier sell from the Western perspective. Nothing more. From an Islamic perspective the attack on the World Trade Center can be viewed as defensive in nature...a form of resistance against Western cultural and political imperialism.
I don't agree with you. Fraud comes in several different forms. Bush's fraud took the form of a negligent misrepresentation. Bush was pursuing the Great America project. Obama committed intentional fraud with the intent to deceive because he never informed the American people that he switched sides. Let us not forget America had been working with Gadhafi against al Qaeda. By switching sides Obama unwisely came to the rescue of anti-Gadhafi forces, including but not limited to al Qaeda affiliated groups.
Lung cancer and pancreatic cancer are drastically different, but lead to the same result. In Afghanistan and Iraq the US Govt. opposed Islamism generally and al Qaeda specifically. In Libya the US Govt. was tacitly allied with al Qaeda affiliated groups. Libya and Iraq are part of a the seamless web by which America has retreated from the middle east.
Actually, Libya is the greater debacle because of the lesson it teaches all despots seeking nuclear weapons. The lesson to be learned is that the word of the US Govt. is worthless. Let us not forget that Gadhafi surrendered his nuclear weapons program in exchange for the promise of peace. Obama breached that understanding. After Gadhafi surrendered his nuclear weapons program to Bush, Mr. Obama turned on him and bombed Gadhafi's forces to smithereens. Gadhafi got nothing for his surrender of his nuke program...other than death. No incipient nuclear weapons state will ever again believe an American promise of peace in exchange for disarmament.
Russia and China believe they were fooled by Obama because he misused the UN resolution to achieve regime change.
The American era is over. The Western created international system will either die or morph into the old sphere of influence/balance of power game. Past as prologue.
The Second Iraq War will pass out of living memory in short order. It will be of interest only to historians. After all who remembers the Wars of the Spanish Succession with poignant emotion? The Second Iraq War is like the Battle of Adrianopole which most historians believe marked the start of the final collapse of the Roman Empire.
What we are seeing is the end of Pax Americana, and the rollback of American influence and power. The ejectment of America from the middle east will be repeated in other regions of the world by forces tempted by the example.
The leftist anti-war movement can be safely ignored from now on. They've proven themselves to be mere partisans seeking domestic political advantage. They don't subscribe to any principle.
Libya was regime change just like Iraq.
Not exactly the A team there. They went in without UN approval. The US and the UK were the only countries to send a significant number of troops.
Oh man. I gave you way too much credit.
As I said, the people on Fox news and Sun news are commentators, just like Jon Stewart. They give their opinion on the news and play to their base.
It certainly doesn't mean that their opinions are never correct, but you have to recognize the difference between news and commentary.
That was my point. I am using it to show the difference between how certain people react to each incident, not to say that the actual war or Benghazi incident were moral or not.
I am comparing Afghanistan to Iraq, not 911. Obviously perspective is very different on opposing sides of a conflict.
It is not fraud to react to changing circumstances in the world. It wasn't the US that decided to intervene in Libya, it was the UN as a whole.
The decision for the US to go into Iraq was made without UN approval and with falsified evidence.
I think our biggest difference on this issue is what we consider the "result" of an action. I think that the most important result is how many people were killed by that decision. In that respect, Iraq and Libya had dramatically different results. The decision to go into Iraq also resulted in a much longer and costlier engagement.
In terms of retreating from the middle east, the plan was never to occupy the place for ever. The US has never really had a firm hold on the region. It is always embroiled in one conflict or another.
Libya ended their nuclear program because they wanted to normalize their relations with the US and get sanctions lifted. There was never any understanding that the US would sit idly by if they started shooting their own citizens or block the UN from acting on a situation like that.
That battle you mention lasted one day. The Iraq war lasted 9 years, right in the midst of an explosion in the amount of media coverage in the US.
It can easily be shown as the reason that the US is now shying away from getting too involved in foreign conflicts.
Or you can say that they simply don't want to be involved in wars. It is not a very complicated ideology.
Iraq was a ground invasion, occupation, and counter insurgency operation. That is very different than what happened in Libya.
Born Ruff if you want to understand why democracy never works ,
simply look in the mirror .
When facts mean nothing democracy is dead .
Moving the goal post again I see. It was not unilateral was it? And who really gives a sh*t about the UN? Many military actions happen without UN approval. And Canada has been in on them as well... they even led one.
At any rate. The Obama Administration lied about Benghazi and there will be investigations because of their lying and getting people killed.
That's exactly what happened and it was shameful behaviour. Attempted deflection by dolts and numbskulls changes none of that.
