Raz and Strix Benghazi monkey shitfight thread

Started by Strix, November 09, 2012, 03:56:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

Strix

November 09, 2012, 03:56:59 PM Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 12:57:34 AM by CountDeMoney
Quote from: The Brain on November 09, 2012, 03:10:56 PM
What was the real reason?

It is obvious from the timing. Obama won the election so he gets to re-write the history of what happened at Benghazi. He cannot go after Hillary so he gets Petraeus out of office puts a lickspittle in his place who willing shifts the blame to the CIA (and it's outgoing Chief). End of story, everyone goes home happy.

It's like a town not having enough fire trucks (State Department security) and than placing all the blame on a neighboring town (CIA security) for not helping enough when the place burns down.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher

The Minsky Moment

#1
November 09, 2012, 04:53:22 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 09, 2012, 03:56:59 PM
It is obvious from the timing. Obama won the election so he gets to re-write the history of what happened at Benghazi. He cannot go after Hillary so he gets Petraeus out of office puts a lickspittle in his place who willing shifts the blame to the CIA (and it's outgoing Chief). End of story, everyone goes home happy.

Someone remind me to invest in the tin foil business.  That stuff always sells.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Strix

#2
November 10, 2012, 07:24:57 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 09, 2012, 04:59:49 PM
"Sweaters" Santorum on Strategos Petraeus:

Quote"It's very disturbing," Santorum says. "We all have our personal failings and none of us are perfect but to put yourself in that type of position and engage in activity which could compromise your ability to do your job is something that is very very disturbing and shows incredibly poor judgement."

Santorum is disturbed not only because Petraeus broke his marital vows "but for putting himself in a position that could compromise the agency."

That's why he had to resign.

:lmfao:  Oh yes, that's the reason. And how long has the Obama Administration been holding that card? Well, they waited until the perfect time to play it.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher

Razgovory

#3
November 10, 2012, 02:08:40 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 10, 2012, 07:24:57 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 09, 2012, 04:59:49 PM
"Sweaters" Santorum on Strategos Petraeus:

Quote"It's very disturbing," Santorum says. "We all have our personal failings and none of us are perfect but to put yourself in that type of position and engage in activity which could compromise your ability to do your job is something that is very very disturbing and shows incredibly poor judgement."

Santorum is disturbed not only because Petraeus broke his marital vows "but for putting himself in a position that could compromise the agency."

That's why he had to resign.

:lmfao:  Oh yes, that's the reason. And how long has the Obama Administration been holding that card? Well, they waited until the perfect time to play it.

What are you an arab now?  Going in for magical thinking?  Pathetic.  The Obama may have held this "card" for some time, but probably not to cover up the non-scandal you seem concerned about.  If Obama lost the election, Petreus could leave with his dignity.  If he won, then he would have to get rid of the general.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Strix

#4
November 10, 2012, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 02:08:40 PMWhat are you an arab now?  Going in for magical thinking?  Pathetic.  The Obama may have held this "card" for some time, but probably not to cover up the non-scandal you seem concerned about.  If Obama lost the election, Petreus could leave with his dignity.  If he won, then he would have to get rid of the general.

Or when the FBI found out and Obama couldn't hold his card anymore.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher

mongers

#5
November 10, 2012, 02:42:18 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 10, 2012, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 02:08:40 PMWhat are you an arab now?  Going in for magical thinking?  Pathetic.  The Obama may have held this "card" for some time, but probably not to cover up the non-scandal you seem concerned about.  If Obama lost the election, Petreus could leave with his dignity.  If he won, then he would have to get rid of the general.

Or when the FBI found out and Obama couldn't hold his card anymore.

Strix you know theres a forum that you might find more at home in:

Final Proof Jackie shot JFK -
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148254
"We have it in our power to begin the world over again"

Razgovory

#6
November 10, 2012, 03:12:18 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 10, 2012, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 02:08:40 PMWhat are you an arab now?  Going in for magical thinking?  Pathetic.  The Obama may have held this "card" for some time, but probably not to cover up the non-scandal you seem concerned about.  If Obama lost the election, Petreus could leave with his dignity.  If he won, then he would have to get rid of the general.

Or when the FBI found out and Obama couldn't hold his card anymore.

That sort a negates your first theory doesn't it?  If the FBI forced his hand, then it wouldn't an attempt to shift blame on the "scandal", of Bengazi.  Unless the FBI was the one shifting blame. 
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

CountDeMoney

#7
November 10, 2012, 07:07:53 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 03:12:18 PM
That sort a negates your first theory doesn't it?  If the FBI forced his hand, then it wouldn't an attempt to shift blame on the "scandal", of Bengazi.  Unless the FBI was the one shifting blame.

Strix must think Petraeus is the only person that could possibly testify next week.

Strix

#8
November 10, 2012, 08:10:49 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 03:12:18 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 10, 2012, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 02:08:40 PMWhat are you an arab now?  Going in for magical thinking?  Pathetic.  The Obama may have held this "card" for some time, but probably not to cover up the non-scandal you seem concerned about.  If Obama lost the election, Petreus could leave with his dignity.  If he won, then he would have to get rid of the general.

Or when the FBI found out and Obama couldn't hold his card anymore.

That sort a negates your first theory doesn't it?  If the FBI forced his hand, then it wouldn't an attempt to shift blame on the "scandal", of Bengazi.  Unless the FBI was the one shifting blame.

No, a scapegoat was needed and the FBI investigation made it easy to get him out of office and pin the blame on the CIA. I doubt the FBI would have made an issue of it if Obama told them not to do so. He would have been replaced as the CIA chief in a less scandalized manner. They would have made it quietly during their other post transitions.

Obama has already managed to change the direction of the investigation. It's no longer a White House or State Department issue but has become a problem with the CIA.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher

11B4V

#9
November 10, 2012, 08:15:57 PM
Bah. I'll wait till it plays out. Congress can still subpena him.
"there's a long tradition of insulting people we disagree with here, and I'll be damned if I listen to your entreaties otherwise."-OVB

"Obviously not a Berkut-commanded armored column.  They're not all brewing."- CdM

"We've reached one of our phase lines after the firefight and it smells bad—meaning it's a little bit suspicious... Could be an amb—".

Razgovory

#10
November 10, 2012, 08:21:23 PM
Okay, I'll bite, why would Petraeus having an affair be an issue for the state department?

Your scenario still doesn't make a lot of sense.  Obama had to act because the FBI found out because Obama directed the FBI to investigate thereby shifting blame from the Benghazi attack that happened over a month ago.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

garbon

#11
November 10, 2012, 08:25:48 PM
Not that I want to assist Strix any, but Raz, the media has been having more and more of a field day over Benghazi in the past week or two.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Strix

#12
November 10, 2012, 08:33:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 08:21:23 PM
Okay, I'll bite, why would Petraeus having an affair be an issue for the state department?

Your scenario still doesn't make a lot of sense.  Obama had to act because the FBI found out because Obama directed the FBI to investigate thereby shifting blame from the Benghazi attack that happened over a month ago.

It isn't. The fact that the State Department didn't provide adequate security in Benghazi and also appeared to ignore/decline attempts by the Ambassador and his staff to increase security is the problem. The CIA happened to have a security team nearby, probably as part of their own facility there, and they attempted to rescue/help the Ambassador and his staff. From the sounds of it, the CIA, or at least the agents in place, went beyond their authority in attempting the rescue. If it is true than it had to have pissed off people in the Administration.

So, having the extra-martial affair hanging over the CIA chief allowed Obama to do several things. First, he is able to remove him as CIA chief in a very disgraceful public manner. Second, he changes the direction of the investigation from White House/State Department to CIA wasn't doing it's job because it's chief was to busy shagging and carrying on. Third, he eliminates any political chances the CIA chief might have had by exposing the affair and ultimately pinning the Benghazi failure on him.

An excellent job by Obama.

Raz, I doubt you are naive enough to think that the FBI forced Obama's hand or that the timing was pure coincidence.  Panetta is on his way out and now the CIA head, Obama will be able to place to sycophants in place without issue.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher

frunk

#13
November 10, 2012, 08:48:04 PM
Quote from: Strix on November 10, 2012, 08:33:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 10, 2012, 08:21:23 PM
Okay, I'll bite, why would Petraeus having an affair be an issue for the state department?

Your scenario still doesn't make a lot of sense.  Obama had to act because the FBI found out because Obama directed the FBI to investigate thereby shifting blame from the Benghazi attack that happened over a month ago.

It isn't. The fact that the State Department didn't provide adequate security in Benghazi and also appeared to ignore/decline attempts by the Ambassador and his staff to increase security is the problem. The CIA happened to have a security team nearby, probably as part of their own facility there, and they attempted to rescue/help the Ambassador and his staff. From the sounds of it, the CIA, or at least the agents in place, went beyond their authority in attempting the rescue. If it is true than it had to have pissed off people in the Administration.


Why would them attempting a rescue piss off the Administration?  That makes no sense.

Strix

#14
November 10, 2012, 08:54:21 PM
Quote from: frunk on November 10, 2012, 08:48:04 PM
Why would them attempting a rescue piss off the Administration?  That makes no sense.

Have you ever worked in government? Little of what they do makes sense. Best guess, the White House/State Department didn't take the attack seriously initially, so they didn't want to upset people in the region by coming in guns blazing. This is why the timeline is so important. The White House was trying to cover up any proof or suggestion that they might have delayed military action.

From the sounds of it, they were having a two hour meeting concerning options while the Ambassador and others were dying.
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions