It's simple, really.

[ontheblack]

Obama's Ambassador.jpg (38.21 KiB) Viewed 5409 times

Apologize or condemn?

Your choice in less than 8 weeks really is that simple.

[Dugout Dad]

Reagan would have already blown up something....yesterday, like the missles he sent over to Gadhafi's compound in 1986. We instead have the Coward in Chief

Here is part of the story:

Then, in 1986, came the most significant confrontation between Reagan and Gadhafi.

In April, terrorists bombed the La Belle discotheque in Berlin. Two American soldiers were killed and more than 150 people were injured. Speculation centered on a Libyan connection and what the United States should do.

Some urged caution. Former President Jimmy Carter said the Reagan administration was making a hero out of Gadhafi and increasing the terrorist threat to Americans.

When Reagan was asked about that at a news conference, he replied: "There's another side of that — that if somebody does this and gets away with it, nothing happens to him, that encourages him to try even harder and do more. ... I think he's more than a bad smell."

The United States had intercepted communications between Libyan officials in Tripoli and their agents in Berlin. Gadhafi was behind the attack.

Teicher, the White House official, was in the Situation Room when the president decided on a military response.

Some thought Reagan was too fixated on Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, shown in Tripoli in February 1986.

"Reagan would sort of, like, cock his head a little bit to one side and maybe shut his eyes and look a little disappointed and say, 'Well, I see no alternative but to authorize the action that ... you're recommending,' " Teicher says.

'We Have Done What We Had To Do'

What Reagan authorized became known as Operation El Dorado Canyon. After it was over, the president went on TV to address the nation:

"At 7 this evening Eastern time, air and naval forces of the United States launched a series of strikes against the headquarters, terrorist facilities and military assets that support Moammar Gadhafi's subversive activities. From initial reports, our forces have succeeded in their mission."

Military targets were hit in Tripoli and Benghazi. Libya reported that dozens were killed, including Gadhafi's daughter.

"Today, we have done what we had to do," Reagan said. "If necessary, we shall do it again."

That wasn't the end of it.

Three years later, in January 1989, two American F-14s engaged in a dogfight with Libyan MiG fighter jets. The American jets shot down both Libyan planes.

[ontheblack]

When Reagan was asked about that at a news conference, he replied: "There's another side of that — that if somebody does this and gets away with it, nothing happens to him, that encourages him to try even harder and do more. ... I think he's more than a bad smell."

Reagan was right. We did nothing and the German Embassy was attacked overnight.

The woman who manages my neighborhood Starbucks was furious this morning. Her husband is an ex Marine who pulled 3 tours in Afghanistan. It was amazing to hear other young people there talk about the cowardice of our President.

I would like to see Obama appoint Rahm Emmanuel to replace Ambassador Stevens.

[jonriv]

Reagan would have already blown up something....yesterday, like the missles he sent over to Gadhafi's compound in 1986. We instead have the Coward in Chief

Here is part of the story:

Then, in 1986, came the most significant confrontation between Reagan and Gadhafi.

In April, terrorists bombed the La Belle discotheque in Berlin. Two American soldiers were killed and more than 150 people were injured. Speculation centered on a Libyan connection and what the United States should do.

Some urged caution. Former President Jimmy Carter said the Reagan administration was making a hero out of Gadhafi and increasing the terrorist threat to Americans.

When Reagan was asked about that at a news conference, he replied: "There's another side of that — that if somebody does this and gets away with it, nothing happens to him, that encourages him to try even harder and do more. ... I think he's more than a bad smell."

The United States had intercepted communications between Libyan officials in Tripoli and their agents in Berlin. Gadhafi was behind the attack.

Teicher, the White House official, was in the Situation Room when the president decided on a military response.

Some thought Reagan was too fixated on Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, shown in Tripoli in February 1986.

"Reagan would sort of, like, cock his head a little bit to one side and maybe shut his eyes and look a little disappointed and say, 'Well, I see no alternative but to authorize the action that ... you're recommending,' " Teicher says.

'We Have Done What We Had To Do'

What Reagan authorized became known as Operation El Dorado Canyon. After it was over, the president went on TV to address the nation:

"At 7 this evening Eastern time, air and naval forces of the United States launched a series of strikes against the headquarters, terrorist facilities and military assets that support Moammar Gadhafi's subversive activities. From initial reports, our forces have succeeded in their mission."

Military targets were hit in Tripoli and Benghazi. Libya reported that dozens were killed, including Gadhafi's daughter.

"Today, we have done what we had to do," Reagan said. "If necessary, we shall do it again."

That wasn't the end of it.

Three years later, in January 1989, two American F-14s engaged in a dogfight with Libyan MiG fighter jets. The American jets shot down both Libyan planes.

Please know your facts- Reagan did not send a missle- he sent F111s fron England that dropped good old fashioned iron bombs.


Who do you want to bomb?? Gadafi is dead. There is a fragile new governement(that we supported) that obviously does not have control. This was an act by a al-queda splinter group that used the demonstrations as a cover for their coordinated attack. Unless we know who did it and where they are-who do we bomb. Indiscrimate bombing would only cause more problems and make enemies of those who like us(the majority in Libya like us for our help getting rid of a tyrant) I am no big Obama fan and do not like his comments on this situation, but please. reagan bombed because he had a legit target

[Dugout Dad]

Missiles or iron bombs, really? Same difference, same outcome.
0bama's support of the Arab Spring has destabilized the Middle East. I was not a Gadhafi fan, but at least he had control of these animals.

[jonriv]

Missiles or iron bombs, really? Same difference, same outcome.
0bama's support of the Arab Spring has destabilized the Middle East. I was not a Gadhafi fan, but at least he had control of these animals.

You would rather have dictators????

Part of the arguement for going into Iraq was that it would create a domino effect of removing thse dictators- that what is happening?? I would prefer a democracy any day. Democracies do not go to war gainst each other.


BTW- Several Naval ships, drones and 50 marines have been deployed

[ontheblack]

I wasnt suggesting retaliation as there really is no one to retaliate against. Apologizing, however, is offensive. It will be a very sad day in America if it's Obama taking the oath of office on Jan 20.

50 Marines? Really? He should deploy at least 50 additional Marines for each American Embassy.

@Spaz - Amen.

[Dugout Dad]

Missiles or iron bombs, really? Same difference, same outcome.
0bama's support of the Arab Spring has destabilized the Middle East. I was not a Gadhafi fan, but at least he had control of these animals.

You would rather have dictators????

Part of the arguement for going into Iraq was that it would create a domino effect of removing thse dictators- that what is happening?? I would prefer a democracy any day. Democracies do not go to war gainst each other.


BTW- Several Naval ships, drones and 50 marines have been deployed

Unfortunately, democracies only work with civilized people.

Wow, a whole 50 marines against that mob, sounds like a suicide mission.

Smells like 1979.

BTW- America "was warned of embassy attack but did nothing"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.html

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=284684

[Trophy Hunter]

Missiles or iron bombs, really? Same difference, same outcome.
0bama's support of the Arab Spring has destabilized the Middle East. I was not a Gadhafi fan, but at least he had control of these animals.

You would rather have dictators????

Part of the arguement for going into Iraq was that it would create a domino effect of removing thse dictators- that what is happening?? I would prefer a democracy any day. Democracies do not go to war gainst each other.


BTW- Several Naval ships, drones and 50 marines have been deployed

What's problematic about these situations is that you don't know how they will play out. Mubarak may have been a dictator, in practice at least, but he did maintain relative calm in his sphere. Now with the Muslim Brotherhood in control, I can't imagine that working out well for U.S. interests in the region. Sometimes the devil you know is preferable to the one you don't see coming.

As for the deployment, the naval ships might help in an emergency but there is a response time before that support arrives. In the meantime, 50 marines might slow down an attack, but what we need there is a larger in your face presence. Mind you its all for show anyway, as the attack was well coordinated and the leaders are long gone, having successfully caught the U.S. asleep at the wheel on the anniversary of 9/11.

[jonriv]

Missiles or iron bombs, really? Same difference, same outcome.
0bama's support of the Arab Spring has destabilized the Middle East. I was not a Gadhafi fan, but at least he had control of these animals.

You would rather have dictators????

Part of the arguement for going into Iraq was that it would create a domino effect of removing thse dictators- that what is happening?? I would prefer a democracy any day. Democracies do not go to war gainst each other.


BTW- Several Naval ships, drones and 50 marines have been deployed

What's problematic about these situations is that you don't know how they will play out. Mubarak may have been a dictator, in practice at least, but he did maintain relative calm in his sphere. Now with the Muslim Brotherhood in control, I can't imagine that working out well for U.S. interests in the region. Sometimes the devil you know is preferable to the one you don't see coming.

As for the deployment, the naval ships might help in an emergency but there is a response time before that support arrives. In the meantime, 50 marines might slow down an attack, but what we need there is a larger in your face presence. Mind you its all for show anyway, as the attack was well coordinated and the leaders are long gone, having successfully caught the U.S. asleep at the wheel on the anniversary of 9/11.

There have been 4 arrests already from the attack- more are expected. I believe the 50 Marines are a reaction force to be used when a "target" is found.

It is sad when the "Arsenal of Democracy" does not deam others worthy. Sometimes they may not turn out or vote they way you want them to, but I will take a demorcact of a dictatorship, kindom etc any day