9/11 approaches, embassies to close in the Arab World due to terror threat

[KCFlyer]

Fact is they've done nothing in the past 11 months. How hard is it to put a decent contingent of Marines into each these places? That would at least project some power.

Instead, we continue to see local security contracted out to the same kind of guys who conveniently weren't there on 9/11/12, and now there's a precedent being set where the local terror cell can force the embassy to close up shop at the first whiffs of trouble.

And people wonder why Putin gave Snowden asylum?...

If we did happen to put a contingent of Marines there....and terrorists attacked them, would it be okay for Obama to emulate Reagan and do what he did in 1983? After all, he'd just be emulating the best president this country has ever known....how could the right #### about that???

 

[xUT]

If we did happen to put a contingent of Marines there....and terrorists attacked them, would it be okay for Obama to emulate Reagan and do what he did in 1983? After all, he'd just be emulating the best president this country has ever known....how could the right #### about that???

That was different.Didn't you get the memo...
241 were killed and our response was to run...
Yea I remember that...
B)

 

[xUT]

That was different.Didn't you get the memo...
241 were killed and our response was to run...
Yea I remember that...
B)

That's why we are not trusted. Our policies are consistently inconsistent.
B) xUT

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

I've not been a big Cheney fan starting with him being hired to select a VP and he selected Cheney. Benghazi is a major problem for this administration and they don't want to see a repeat. Not because of great concern for the embassies rather concern for the administration in power.

' Snap,
As far as I'm concerned they should KEEP Every embassy closed......in every G D Country, that we truly can't trust, short of the Superpowers like China/Russia. As for the Saudi Arabia's / Yemens / Pakistans etc, I'm for 'homeporting' a nuclear ballistic submarine, on everyone of thier doorsteps !!!

 

[Deleted member 14439]

EXTORTION 17. RIP Guys, you are not forgotten. 8-6-2011

 

[xUT]

EXTORTION 17. RIP Guys, you are not forgotten. 8-6-2011

EXTORTION 17
http://extortion17.com/index.php/home

 

[eolesen]

 

[KCFlyer]

Cute cartoons Eric. Let me ask you...if Obama put Marines at every embassy and a terrorist attack killed a hundred of them, would you be okay with a Reaganesque cut and run maneuver? I thought Bush took care of al qaeda by invading Iraq. What happened?

 

[eolesen]

You can't compare Lebanon with today -- the country was in the middle of a civil war, and the US were seen as taking sides as opposed to being a peace-keeping force with limited power to engage & defend. The Libertarian in me says that we never should have been involved in the conflict in the first place.

"Cut and run" tactics result in what we see today -- an emboldened enemy who knows that they have the upper hand, and can disrupt our way of life by simply making claims of an attack vs. actually being capable of executing one.

Fact is, if you put Marines up on the wall with real ammunition, a suicide bomber would never get close enough to an embassy to do any serious damage. But put them up there with empty clips, as was done in Egypt? You might as well post a couple manniquens in combat fatiques holding a $10 Airsoft rifle...

If the host countries have a problem with us our defending our own Embassies, then close them down. Let them deal with the diplomatic embarrassment of not having an ambassador in residence.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

You can't compare Lebanon with today -- the country was in the middle of a civil war, and the US were seen as taking sides as opposed to being a peace-keeping force with limited power to engage & defend. The Libertarian in me says that we never should have been involved in the conflict in the first place.

"Cut and run" tactics result in what we see today -- an emboldened enemy who knows that they have the upper hand, and can disrupt our way of life by simply making claims of an attack vs. actually being capable of executing one.

Fact is, if you put Marines up on the wall with real ammunition, a suicide bomber would never get close enough to an embassy to do any serious damage. But put them up there with empty clips, as was done in Egypt? You might as well post a couple manniquens in combat fatiques holding a $10 Airsoft rifle...

If the host countries have a problem with us our defending our own Embassies, then close them down. Let them deal with the diplomatic embarrassment of not having an ambassador in residence.

You ALWAYS have an Excuse nearly everytime someone (KC Flyer this times) asks you a crystal clear question !!!!!!!!!!!!

Any chance as a kid, you answered a lot of questions with a..... " Yeah,.. B U T " ??

 

[eolesen]

I did answer, Bears. I said Cut and Run doesn't work. You wind up emboldening the enemy.

Do I need to translate that into Southie for you?.... You might as well roll over on your back and pee on yourself.


Sorry if the differences between being in the middle of a civil war, and being attacked in peacetime are lost on both of you.

How many died during the peacekeeping in Korea, the Balkans? You want to compare those to Lebanon, go for it. The highest number of deaths in Iraq came during the infighting between tribes, and not the actual invasion.


But comparing a Benghazi type attack to what happened in Beirut? Only an idiot would try to keep that line of discussion going because there's no comparison to the two situations aside from people dying.

Lots of lessons learned since then, i.e. employing more physical separation and vehicle barriers, and establishing multiple perimeters. You can see it employed in most of the embassies in hostile locations.

Recruits two weeks into boot camp could have defended Benghazi better than the local rent-a-guns did... and they'd have been a deterrent enough to make the AQ's look for a softer target. But apparently doing that in Benghazi would have offended the locals, or perhaps resulted in too many eyes to notice an illegal gun running operation...

 

[Ms Tree]

I did answer, Bears. I said Cut and Run doesn't work. You wind up emboldening the enemy.

Do I need to translate that into Southie for you?.... You might as well roll over on your back and pee on yourself.


Sorry if the differences between being in the middle of a civil war, and being attacked in peacetime are lost on both of you.

How many died during the peacekeeping in Korea, the Balkans? You want to compare those to Lebanon, go for it. The highest number of deaths in Iraq came during the infighting between tribes, and not the actual invasion.


But comparing a Benghazi type attack to what happened in Beirut? Only an idiot would try to keep that line of discussion going because there's no comparison to the two situations aside from people dying.

Lots of lessons learned since then, i.e. employing more physical separation and vehicle barriers, and establishing multiple perimeters. You can see it employed in most of the embassies in hostile locations.

Recruits two weeks into boot camp could have defended Benghazi better than the local rent-a-guns did... and they'd have been a deterrent enough to make the AQ's look for a softer target. But apparently doing that in Benghazi would have offended the locals, or perhaps resulted in too many eyes to notice an illegal gun running operation...

Libya is peace time? Go figure. Might not be an all out civil war but I don't think I'd say they are at peace.

 

[eolesen]

Still no comparison, Tree.

The war in Lebanon had been going on for six or seven years before the peacekeeping forces showed up.

Libya's war was over, and they had free elections just over two months prior to the attack on the consulate.

 

[Ms Tree]

Just because someone declares a war is over does not mean the war is actually over. Look at Iraq, look at Egypt. Look at Libya. Just because elections are held does not mean the war is over either.

I guess your outlook on the events in Iraq are OK if one assumes the war ended with the invasion. Personally I think that is a bit convenient. I do not see a war as being over till the forces are pulled out completely or the casualties stop. The invasion may have been short and sweet in Iraq but the war continued and in my opinion is still going on to this day. I believe the same thing is happening in Libya as well just on a smaller scale. Elections did nothing to change that.

As fas contracting out our defense. We that took off whole sale with Blackwater. Seems we would rather pay someone 3 or 4 times the amount of money to do what a soldier could have done had we had the soldiers to begin with. But hey, you go to war with what you have, not what you want right? I guess we could go ahead and increase the armed contingency forces at each embassy but that would increase costs and who is going to pay for that? We are in a bit of debt right now. Personally I would rather see the money spent on rebuilding infrastructure, universal health care, education and stuff we actually need.

As far as Beirut is concerned, I see that as being far worse, especially in light of your description. On going war for 6 years and you stick a compound in the middle of it with out a plan to defend it? Great idea. Seems pretty similar to the embassy situation as far as I can tell.

For what it’s worth. I do think the embassies should be better defended. I think the defense budget is plenty big enough to take care of that. I’m sure they could find the money somewhere if they are really concerned for the staff.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

For what its worth. I do think the embassies should be better defended. I think the defense budget is plenty big enough to take care of that. I'm sure they could find the money somewhere if they are really concerned for the staff.

One or two copies of an F-22 at $361M each should about cover that.