US embassies attacked

[donald236]

There is no way this is not going to be politicized especially in an election year. No matter if it is Democrats or Republicans either side would use this to gain an advantage.

This is direct result in the soft power used by the current administration. Terrorist are not going to change their mind or their goals by being coddled to. This is a perfect example of how any positive effect of US diplomacy will be targeted. The US government knew the Embassy was at risk and not only reduced the number of security forces but refused them extra security when asked for. I find it hard to believe that the White house was unaware of the threat on the Embassy or for that matter the 11th anniversary of 9-11 should have raised the level of security alone.

Talk about the disservice of the victims memory, where is the outrage of the public and press to pressure the US and Libyan Governments for action to bring the terrorist to justice?

 

[ITGUY]

I think the proper course for a candidate would be "We need to hunt them down and bring them to justice. Let's work to ensure it never happens again. I think we can do it better and here's how...". That's not how I remember it happening though.

Agree with the whole part about terrorists not changing their minds but I don't know who's coddling them. I mean to tell you that there's a lot of guys who are in the business of making sure that terrorists get to paradise pretty quick. There aren't too many weeks that go by without a UAV taking some one out somewhere. With that in mind, we regularly violate the airspace of Pakistan. We also operate UAVs in other countries too. Is that soft power? I'm pretty sure the US government will be taking action. After it happens, you might just hear about it.

And I doubt the White House was concerned with embassy security on 9/11 unless there was intelligence to indicate they ought to be. There was a huge intelligence failure at play here to be sure just like there was on 9/11 eleven years ago. Embassy security is under the State Department in the responsibility of Diplomatic Security (DS). They didn't see this one coming, bad intelligence.

I think there is outrage in the press and the public to hunt them down. Pretty sure it's already happening. The press and the public don't need to know how.

 

[ilovesubasketball]

"We need to hunt them down and bring them to justice. Let's work to ensure it never happens again. I think we can do it better and here's how...".

I believe the same was said after the 9/11 attacks. I don't want to get into a debate n how successfull that was, there has already been a discussin about that here, I just want to say that politics is more careful about using that line as they already have their hands full with the concequences of the last time they said it.

 

[Yippidyyappidy]

You're making the assumption that politicians actually learn from their mistakes. I would suggest that there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

[cute_cuddly_tyger]

One would at least hope that the US does not invade a country that had nothing to do with this.....that one still mystifies me.

 

[imcool]

Which invasion by the US are you referring to?

 

[cadetskydome]

In this instance, Iraq.

 

[ryanandrewquick]

Regime change, oil. Mmmm.... it's not really a very long list of possible reasons, really.

 

[JulieAM]

Actually, there's more. There was an effort to tie Iraq to Al Qaida in the beginning. Then there was the WMD. However you're looking at possible real reasons. You mentioned two. There's also conflict with a definable nation state that could contribute to re-election in 2004. There's also "I'm gonna finnish the job my Daddy started". I'm mystified about a valid reason.

 

[schoolgirl]

It sounds like a lot of what would be a 'valid' reason to the politicians wouldn't be a valid one to you. But the same would propbably be true of a lot of invasions. They're not generally things which CAN be justified in terms of international law and so forth, but they still tend to happen quite a lot anyway.

 

[SgurUran]

The goal of far too many politicians, particularly those successful in their careers, is to advance their career by which ever tactical means they can get away with. Being a successful wartime leader is always a bonus. Being a disastrous wartime leader and making it look good is just as good.