[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Legionary wrote:
No, really, attention to detail in something as sensitive as diplomacy is not an insignificant matter. [/quote]
The incorrect usage of ‘embassy’ is insignificant.
[/quote]
Agree, it is like saying 57 states or calling the Republic a democracy during the DNC
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but are not consulates and embassies considered U.S. soil?
A country attacked our embassy, killed our ambassador along with tow other people…and all the President can say is “that was an outrageous act”
What in the world have we come to.[/quote]
Who in the Libyan government gave an order to kill the US government’s ambassador?
Should all Libyan people need suffer blame for something they have no control over?[/quote]
Those in power know who did the killing…they should hand over the killers.
Not all of the people, just the one’s who you know…killed our ambassador and drug him through the cheering crowds.
[/quote]
Why does US government get a free pass and Libyan government does not?
Obama has ordered the assassination of people with drones.
I say we hand him over to be dealt with as the war criminal he is.[/quote]
Forget Obama for the moment. Do you want the killers of these Americans brought to justice? He made a simple and narrow statement.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Legionary wrote:
No, really, attention to detail in something as sensitive as diplomacy is not an insignificant matter. [/quote]
The incorrect usage of ‘embassy’ is insignificant.
[/quote]
Agree, it is like saying 57 states or calling the Republic a democracy during the DNC[/quote]
Well, we could disqualify the Democrats from nominating a potential Commander-in-Chief.
Russian ships displayed at DNC tribute to vets
http://www.navytimes.com/mobile/news/2012/09/navy-russian-warships-displayed-dnc-veterans-tribute-091112
Or the man who was on extended vacation in Paris pushing his vitriolic “faith” on others while the Vietnam War raged on? Both those examples are indeed valid mistakes (if not off topic), but where did I say Obama or his party were infallible? If I vote Democrat does that make me just another cookie cutter “Liberal”? I don’t shape my beliefs along party lines. “The incorrect usage of ‘embassy’ is insignificant.” It shouldn’t be among those who believe Foreign Policy to be absolutely vital to the survival and prosperity of the state. In my humble opinion, I don’t think its unreasonable for me to have reservations about Romney’s ability to make educated decisions on Foreign Policy matters if he doesn’t even know the difference between an embassy and a consulate.
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
I like this guy, Add George Bush and Tony Blair to that list as well. [/quote]
No love for Clinton?
[/quote]
Why does US government get a free pass and Libyan government does not?
Obama has ordered the assassination of people with drones.
I say we hand him over to be dealt with as the war criminal he is.[/quote]
I’ll also be the first one to agree with you that this guy is living in a naive fantasy land.
[quote]Legionary wrote:
Or the man who was in Paris pushing his vitriolic “faith” on others while the Vietnam War raged on? [/quote]
So… You are about to complain about off topic talking points, yet did it yourself?
What is wrong with him being a Mormon and how does that effect his leadership?
You didn’t. I believe we were making examples to back up our opinions, and, at the same time, mentioned they aren’t “big deals” either.
How is this at all relevant to anything?
The incorrect usage of democracy shouldn’t be passed over when the function of government is absolutely vital to the survival, prosperity and freedom of the citizenry. In my humble opinion I don’t think its unreasonable to have reservations about a man’s ability to make educated decisions of domestic matters, particularly when he is supposed to be a representative not a dictator with EO’s, if he doesn’t know the difference between a constitutional republic and democracy.
See how easy that is…
I don’t think your opinion is invalid, just that I (we) disagree.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Legionary wrote:
Or the man who was in Paris pushing his vitriolic “faith” on others while the Vietnam War raged on? [/quote]
So… You are about to complain about off topic talking points, yet did it yourself?
What is wrong with him being a Mormon and how does that effect his leadership?
I don’t think your opinion is invalid, just that I (we) disagree. [/quote]
Fair enough, we can agree to disagree. The competition of ideas is one reason this nation is truly great. His Mormonism is a topic for another thread I suppose but it ties into how he was spending his time while his nation was fighting a war in Indochina. I just find it ironic that someone who touts himself as “tough on defense” and “a friend of the Military” was conveniently absent from service during that time. Apparently leadership from over 5000 miles away is the way to go?
The Libyan people voted for the secular party in a landslide. There must be lots of decent people over there absolutely horrified right now.
I sincerely hope we do not conflate the tragic acts of today, carried out by extremist lowlifes, with the actions of the Libyan people as a whole.
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
The Libyan people voted for the secular party in a landslide. There must be lots of decent people over there absolutely horrified right now.
I sincerely hope we do not conflate the tragic acts of today, carried out by extremist lowlifes, with the actions of the Libyan people as a whole.[/quote]
Not at all, but is it too much to ask that secular party who is in power, to hand over the terrorists who did this?
It’s quite possible that the crowd was infiltrated with some organized terrorist types who did this because of the opportunity to hide in the crowd and strike at a non military soft target under the guise of the ‘protest’.
The fact that the muslim world reacts in this way to any perceived slight or perceived offence to islam is sickening in its own right, regardless.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
The fact that the muslim world reacts in this way to any perceived slight or perceived offence to islam is sickening in its own right, regardless. [/quote]
This is the irresistible force meeting our increasingly movable object.
I think Romney better make all he can out of it because it is probably his last hur-rah
Simple solution: Set a barrier a reasonable distance from US embassy. If a crowd of crazy, protesting, Islamic extremists cross the barrier, mow them down with a mini gun.
Since violence is the only language these crazy fuckers understand and their “hearts and minds” will never be won, I have NO PROBLEM killing them when ever there is an opportunity. That is not to say I want to turn each Islamic country into a sheet of glass, but when a crowd of crazy fuckers is holding an embassy hostage, I view that as an imminent threat to US soil, and feel entitled to respond with overwhelming force.
This should accomplish two things: 1) if they have the ability to learn, then we will train them not to protest outside of our embassies, which is a good thing. 2) if they CONTINUE to protest and cross the line, we will have successfully killed some enemies of the US. Win=Win
I also think we should start dipping our bullets in pig blood and start burning some Korans. Since religion is the guiding force in their lives, it’s foolish not to exploit it’s inherent weakness and use as much psychological warfare against our enemy as possible. Put them off balance, draw them out, kill them.
Why the fuck are we still talking to and trying to reason with these stone age savages?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Simple solution: Set a barrier a reasonable distance from US embassy. If a crowd of crazy, protesting, Islamic extremists cross the barrier, mow them down with a mini gun.
Since violence is the only language these crazy fuckers understand and their “hearts and minds” will never be won, I have NO PROBLEM killing them when ever there is an opportunity. That is not to say I want to turn each Islamic country into a sheet of glass, but when a crowd of crazy fuckers is holding an embassy hostage, I view that as an imminent threat to US soil, and feel entitled to respond with overwhelming force.
This should accomplish two things: 1) if they have the ability to learn, then we will train them not to protest outside of our embassies, which is a good thing. 2) if they CONTINUE to protest and cross the line, we will have successfully killed some enemies of the US. Win=Win
I also think we should start dipping our bullets in pig blood and start burning some Korans. Since religion is the guiding force in their lives, it’s foolish not to exploit it’s inherent weakness and use as much psychological warfare against our enemy as possible. Put them off balance, draw them out, kill them.
Why the fuck are we still talking to and trying to reason with these stone age savages? [/quote]
Damn you’ve got anger issues.
Reason with stone age savages? The almighty dollar.
And your idea of killing them all? Not really got America anywhere so far has it?
Yes it’s wrong what they did, they shouldn’t have killed those 4 people.
But killing everyone isn’t the answer at all is it.
[quote]
Not at all, but is it too much to ask that secular party who is in power, to hand over the terrorists who did this?[/quote]
Reasonable question, I suppose. I honestly don’t know.
The Libyan government is perilously weak, especially in far off (from the capital) Benghazi.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Simple solution: Set a barrier a reasonable distance from US embassy. If a crowd of crazy, protesting, Islamic extremists cross the barrier, mow them down with a mini gun.
Since violence is the only language these crazy fuckers understand and their “hearts and minds” will never be won, I have NO PROBLEM killing them when ever there is an opportunity. That is not to say I want to turn each Islamic country into a sheet of glass, but when a crowd of crazy fuckers is holding an embassy hostage, I view that as an imminent threat to US soil, and feel entitled to respond with overwhelming force.
[/quote]
Agreed. Hopefully this will be the new protocol.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Bullshit. “We don’t agree with what this man says” is not anything close to “We’re sorry that one of the founding principles of our government guarantees him the right to say it.”[/quote]
Yeah, I addressed that in the same post, a few lines below:
The embassy apologized for it. No, not the principle of speech, as you are trying to cavil, but the “abuse” of it in this context, and not a word about the “abusive” tearing down of the flag. The embassy wants to report that the flag waving was, in its mind, an illegitimate use of speech. It’s absurd, and worse, it’s bad diplomacy.
The embassy declared that the waving of the flag was an illegitimate use of free speech, and apologized for the illegitimate use of it.
Further, if you’re right and I’m wrong, why then did the White House start backpedaling and disavowing the statement as soon as they caught wind of it: “The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government.”?
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
The fact that the muslim world reacts in this way to any perceived slight or perceived offence to islam is sickening in its own right, regardless. [/quote]
This is the irresistible force meeting our increasingly movable object.
[/quote]
They drag us down to their level of stupidity and then beat us with experience. I’m fast losing my Western ‘everyone is entitled to their own cultural/religious viewpoint’ when these kinds of things happen more and more often.
We are NOT here to accommodate every extremist religious nut. They are always exceedingly vocal when they whine about their rights and entitlements in Western countries and are masters of playing our system to forward their agenda. Want to live under sharia? Fuck off to Saudi Arabia…and attacking embassies or consulates? Wtf is that shit??
All I know and have always thought is that the Arab Spring will lead to an Islamic Winter. The ME and north Africa just cannot function as democratic secular states. Not possible. Should leave them to fester in their ignorance…
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Further, if you’re right and I’m wrong, why then did the White House start backpedaling and disavowing the statement as soon as they caught wind of it: “The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government.”?[/quote]
Are you sure that that isn’t just the truth?