Will the Libya Crisis Help Obama or Romney?

[AmericanNation]

3 embassies in 2 days, an ambassador dead, and on the aniversery of 9-11 to boot is a pretty big deal and won't be "forgotten" anywhere near as much as "I will transmit this to Vladimir" which isn't forgotten it just isn't focused on.   

Given how half the country saw this coming makes it a major problem for Obama's foreign policy credibility.  BO handled his response(s) so poorly many people were physically ill / boiling at the situation.  3 major acts of war against the United States and Obama says "It's a bad day, hey I'm off to campaign in Vegas!"

The Romney situation is weird because the media went kamikaze on him for no apparent reason other than hackery.  Everything Romney said was true and well timed.  Frankly he needed to be President on 9-11 and 4 Americans might well be alive.  Not to mention American prestige would be much better.             

[AmericanNation]

3 embassies in 2 days, an ambassador dead, and on the aniversery of 9-11 to boot is a pretty big deal and won't be "forgotten" anywhere near as much as "I will transmit this to Vladimir" which isn't forgotten it just isn't focused on.  

Given how half the country saw this coming makes it a major problem for Obama's foreign policy credibility.  BO handled his response(s) so poorly many people were physically ill / boiling at the situation.  3 major acts of war against the United States and Obama says "It's a bad day, hey I'm off to campaign in Vegas!"

The Romney situation is weird because the media went kamikaze on him for no apparent reason other than hackery.  Everything Romney said was true and well timed.  Frankly he needed to be President on 9-11 and 4 Americans might well be alive.  Not to mention American prestige would be much better.              

Everyone, this guy ^^ talks about people living in a bubble.

Seriously.

I don't know man after reading this and Politico's post about Romney's masculine 6'2 frame, I'm now convinced that Romney would have caught those bullets and RPG's with his teeth  He then would have created 10 American jobs in the auto industry using all that steel.


RIP to the victims and thanks for their service to this country.

...make that 4 embassies in 3 days, thanks for creating this problem and not listening when we shouted that this would happen.  It's another "bad day" let's go campaign in Ohio or something.   

[AmericanNation]

3 embassies in 2 days, an ambassador dead, and on the aniversery of 9-11 to boot is a pretty big deal and won't be "forgotten" anywhere near as much as "I will transmit this to Vladimir" which isn't forgotten it just isn't focused on.   

Given how half the country saw this coming makes it a major problem for Obama's foreign policy credibility.  BO handled his response(s) so poorly many people were physically ill / boiling at the situation.  3 major acts of war against the United States and Obama says "It's a bad day, hey I'm off to campaign in Vegas!"

The Romney situation is weird because the media went kamikaze on him for no apparent reason other than hackery.  Everything Romney said was true and well timed.  Frankly he needed to be President on 9-11 and 4 Americans might well be alive.  Not to mention American prestige would be much better.             

Everyone, this guy ^^ talks about people living in a bubble.

Seriously.

I don't know man after reading this and Politico's post about Romney's masculine 6'2 frame, I'm now convinced that Romney would have caught those bullets and RPG's with his teeth  He then would have created 10 American jobs in the auto industry using all that steel.


RIP to the victims and thanks for their service to this country.

...make that 4 embassies in 3 days, thanks for creating this problem

Yes, patrick1, how dare you?!

and not listening when we shouted that this would happen. 

Who shouted about this, exactly? The voices in your head?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8
Largely my position.  Literally about every non leftist serious person saw this coming and we were telling everyone before and during and after the main events transpired.  It's so incredible how everything was known, predicted, warned, pleaded, greatly detailed, published, etc and you act like "O' shucks, no one saw this coming nothing you could have done, how dare Romney criticize Obama for being a total screw up on foreign policy."

It's another "bad day" let's go campaign in Ohio or something.   

As opposed to, y'know, Romney's disgusting response?
What exactly was disgusting?  Obama, Clinton, and Jay Carney have been the textbook definition of "disgusting" and as far as I can tell Romney has merely pointed out important things (with better timing than BOs Admin.) in a presidential manner.  The dems think this is about a movie on youtube for crying out loud!  Talk about an ignorant-disgusting position.     

[AmericanNation]

Just want to let you know I checked and Bin Laden is still dead.

...and Bush is still more responsible for killing him than Barrack Obama.  I guess I'm missing how getting a phone call on a golf course and saying "yea go ahead and kill the #1 sworn enemy of this country" is an "achievement" or deserving of merit, but than I remember that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden wouldn't say "yes I authorize" for some incomprehensible reason.  So, BO had the ability to say "yes" when 95% of the country would/could do the same thing.  WOW, does he dress himself too?     

[AmericanNation]

Just want to let you know I checked and Bin Laden is still dead.

...and Bush is still more responsible for killing him than Barrack Obama.  I guess I'm missing how getting a phone call on a golf course and saying "yea go ahead and kill the #1 sworn enemy of this country" is an "achievement" or deserving of merit, but than I remember that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden wouldn't say "yes I authorize" for some incomprehensible reason.  So, BO had the ability to say "yes" when 95% of the country would/could do the same thing.  WOW, does he dress himself too?     

There was only a 45% or so chance he was there. The President had to make a decision regarding whether to send American troops into a sovereign middle eastern state for an enemy we weren't even sure was there. You'd all blame him for him as a failure if Bin Laden hadn't been there, so why not give him credit for making the tough decision that proved correct?

It wasn't a tough decision, There was more than a 45% chance ( some reports vary), We have had people in Pakistan for decades now, I wouldn't blame a failed military operation on the president if he didn't do anything wrong/unreasonable (some might, but that's kind of irrelevant).  I'm GIVING HIM CREDIT for saying "yes I authorize", which is all he did.  Bush did far more work and Obama campaigned on reversing the Bush policies that were critical to making it happen.  I also give Obama credit for violating his stupid campaign promises, but I hold him accountable for lying.  You got about 1 out of 6 right :-)          

[AmericanNation]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8
Largely my position.  Literally about every non leftist serious person saw this coming and we were telling everyone before and during and after the main events transpired.  It's so incredible how everything was known, predicted, warned, pleaded, greatly detailed, published, etc and you act like "O' shucks, no one saw this coming nothing you could have done, how dare Romney criticize Obama for being a total screw up on foreign policy."

Sorry, Niall Ferguson doesn't count as a "serious person."

What exactly was disgusting?  Obama, Clinton, and Jay Carney have been the textbook definition of "disgusting" and as far as I can tell Romney has merely pointed out important things (with better timing than BOs Admin.) in a presidential manner.[lolno]  The dems think this is about a movie on youtube for crying out loud!  Talk about an ignorant-disgusting position.

You don't see what's disgusting about smirking about the death of an American ambassador?

Romney didn't smirk about the death of the ambassador, I mean that's so absurd and disingenuous that you have to not be thinking when you said that, or you're motivated/blinded by hate, or in an echo chamber spewing that filth, or something like that. 

Isn't getting someone killed by ones incompetence worse, than say your mouth supposedly moving upward when making important comments? ? ?     

[AmericanNation]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8
Largely my position.  Literally about every non leftist serious person saw this coming and we were telling everyone before and during and after the main events transpired.  It's so incredible how everything was known, predicted, warned, pleaded, greatly detailed, published, etc and you act like "O' shucks, no one saw this coming nothing you could have done, how dare Romney criticize Obama for being a total screw up on foreign policy."

Sorry, Niall Ferguson doesn't count as a "serious person."

What exactly was disgusting?  Obama, Clinton, and Jay Carney have been the textbook definition of "disgusting" and as far as I can tell Romney has merely pointed out important things (with better timing than BOs Admin.) in a presidential manner.[lolno]  The dems think this is about a movie on youtube for crying out loud!  Talk about an ignorant-disgusting position.

You don't see what's disgusting about smirking about the death of an American ambassador?

Romney didn't smirk about the death of the ambassador,

Romney made a factually inaccurate speech about the attacks on the embassies for political gain, and after he concluded, he smirked.
I'm unaware of any inaccurate facts.  I've been busy so I haven't checked, but I would think that someone would point out one inaccurate thing on this thread to bolster their argument, so far nothing.
...
...
Okay, I'll concede he may have been smirking about the attacks in general, or about the effect they would have had on the election. That's no less despicable.
This is a serious situation and you're reduced to this level? I mean come up with something better.  "Obama laughed at the holocaust" would be on your level in this case.

I mean that's so absurd and disingenuous that you have to not be thinking when you said that, or you're motivated/blinded by hate, or in an echo chamber spewing that filth, or something like that.  

Hypocrisy is a word you should look up, AmericanNation.

Isn't getting someone killed by ones incompetence

That's some laughable spin right there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8 no spin, all facts, documented, verified, witnessed, simple cold hard truth.  I would say I told you so, but I feel bad about it more than if I didn't know it was coming. It's like premonition guilt.  

worse, than say your mouth supposedly moving upward when making important comments? ? ?      

Obama took the attacks seriously. Romney didn't. Which one would be better on foreign policy is obvious.

Seriously?!?!?  HE THINKS THE ATTACKS ARE BECAUSE OF A YOUTUBE VIDEO!  HE DOESN'T THINK HE DID ANYTHING WRONG in 'backing' the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and Libya. Romney is right on both those points and Obama is insanely wrong.  So, yeah Romney would clear a pretty low bar as far as being better on foreign policy.  

[AmericanNation]

It wasn't a tough decision, There was more than a 45% chance ( some reports vary), We have had people in Pakistan for decades now, I wouldn't blame a failed military operation on the president if he didn't do anything wrong/unreasonable (some might, but that's kind of irrelevant).    

Bullcrap.  If Operation Eagle Claw had worked, then Jimmy Carter would have been reelected.  The decision to go after Bin Laden was definitely a tough one on many levels, one of which was political.  If Bin Laden hadn't been there, or worse, was there but got away, then Obama would have thrown away any chance of being reelected. Whereas, if it had been decided to not go on the mission, the election right now would be much the same as it is now.  Romney might be marginally closer, but not significantly so.

If nothing else, it is an example of Obama being willing to do what his gut told him was the right thing to do instead of being willing to do what his gut told him was the right thing to do politically, which seems to be Romney's MO.  That's why Obama is winning this election right now.  More people prefer Obama's guts to Romney's.

I disagree that it would be a huge political liability.  I mean, look at Bill Clinton's popularity and he missed/messed up getting Bin Laden at least 2 or 3 times.  Bush/US military 'could' have got Bin Laden at Torra Borra supposedly and he was reelected.  The fact that you lead with "taking a minor political risk in order to authorize a necessary military operation" as some major accomplishment basically confirms my point(s).     

Obama took the attacks seriously. Romney didn't. Which one would be better on foreign policy is obvious.

Seriously?!?!?  HE THINKS THE ATTACKS ARE BECAUSE OF A YOUTUBE VIDEO!  HE DOESN'T THINK HE DID ANYTHING WRONG in 'backing' the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and Libya. Romney is right on both those points and Obama is insanely wrong.  So, yeah Romney would clear a pretty low bar as far as being better on foreign policy. 

No, the protests were because of the video as used by those who wanted to stoke a confrontation for their own aims.  The attack on our consulate in Bengazi was a terrorist operation that took advantage of the protest there as cover.

Again you're making my point.  These attacks have almost nothing to do with the video and Obama, Clinton, Carney, Dems think it's the major/only reason.  Worse they have a hard time comprehending the real reasons and will refuse to admit/confront them.  That's why Obama didn't see this coming and it was obvious to so many of us. 

Also, "I'm not George W. Bush and please Love me" is not a viable foreign policy.   

[AmericanNation]

It wasn't a tough decision, There was more than a 45% chance ( some reports vary), We have had people in Pakistan for decades now, I wouldn't blame a failed military operation on the president if he didn't do anything wrong/unreasonable (some might, but that's kind of irrelevant).    

Bullcrap.  If Operation Eagle Claw had worked, then Jimmy Carter would have been reelected.  The decision to go after Bin Laden was definitely a tough one on many levels, one of which was political.  If Bin Laden hadn't been there, or worse, was there but got away, then Obama would have thrown away any chance of being reelected.

Rubbish. We probably never would have heard about it, and even if we did May 2011 - November 2012 is an eternity in politics.

Possibly if Obama had decided not to go it would have never been heard about, but if Obama gave the go ahead and the mission went wrong, it most certainly would have been heard about it, and we'd have a least a few Republican yahoos talking about impeaching the President for invading Pakistan in a failed mission that cost US lives.  Plus the diplomatic fallout could easily have been far worse.  Suppose instead of Bin Laden, the compound held the family of a retired Pakistani general who had an Arab wife or two?

Do you really believe the administration did not have a contingency plan in place to explain away the events had things took a turn for the worse, or had Bin Laden not been there? That's just political spin. I mean, no administration since Carter has been THAT incompetent. Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates and David Petreaus are brilliant patriots who never would have allowed this operation to turn into Operation Eagle Claw 2011 regardless of what happened. Obama and Co. were fully aware of this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is no evidence that having a slick tongue and a knack for campaigning is all it takes to be a good president (e.g., Obama and his record). You want to talk about correlation and causality, Romney has nothing to do with previous presidents who had business experience. Furthermore, Romney's stint as Governor of Massachusetts was every bit as successful as anything Bill Clinton did as Governor of Arkansas, for example. Romney is to competence what Obama is to rhetoric. This will be abundantly clear after we win the debates and blanket the airwaves in October.

..they also drafted a memo blaming everything on the military commander (can't remember if it was a general or an admiral) if something went wrong.  They had a fall guy in place.   

[AmericanNation]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8 no spin, all facts, documented, verified, witnessed, simple cold hard truth.  I would say I told you so, but I feel bad about it more than if I didn't know it was coming. It's like premonition guilt.

Niall Ferguson is not a valid source.

WOW, that's like saying "there is no such thing as a valid source." 

Plus, this is an example (different than a source) of virtually every non leftist/non Obama loving person in the world predicting exactly what would happen as a result of BO's (lack of a) foreign policy throughout the entire timeline of events.  I know this one of my fields of expertise, but get your head out of the sand.   

[AmericanNation]

It wasn't a tough decision, There was more than a 45% chance ( some reports vary), We have had people in Pakistan for decades now, I wouldn't blame a failed military operation on the president if he didn't do anything wrong/unreasonable (some might, but that's kind of irrelevant).    

Bullcrap.  If Operation Eagle Claw had worked, then Jimmy Carter would have been reelected.  The decision to go after Bin Laden was definitely a tough one on many levels, one of which was political.  If Bin Laden hadn't been there, or worse, was there but got away, then Obama would have thrown away any chance of being reelected.

Rubbish. We probably never would have heard about it, and even if we did May 2011 - November 2012 is an eternity in politics.

Possibly if Obama had decided not to go it would have never been heard about, but if Obama gave the go ahead and the mission went wrong, it most certainly would have been heard about it, and we'd have a least a few Republican yahoos talking about impeaching the President for invading Pakistan in a failed mission that cost US lives.  Plus the diplomatic fallout could easily have been far worse.  Suppose instead of Bin Laden, the compound held the family of a retired Pakistani general who had an Arab wife or two?

Do you really believe the administration did not have a contingency plan in place to explain away the events had things took a turn for the worse, or had Bin Laden not been there? That's just political spin. I mean, no administration since Carter has been THAT incompetent. Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates and David Petreaus are brilliant patriots who never would have allowed this operation to turn into Operation Eagle Claw 2011 regardless of what happened. Obama and Co. were fully aware of this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

..they also drafted a memo blaming everything on the military commander (can't remember if it was a general or an admiral) if something went wrong.  They had a fall guy in place.   

And of course everyone would just agree with the memo, thereby insulating Obama from all political fallout.   If you're going to be a hack, at least be an intelligent hack.  Do you seriously think anyone in the administration would think a memo pointing out that Obama relied on the judgment of the military would work to deflect the blame for a failure from him?  It sure didn't help Carter with the fallout from the Eagle Claw fiasco.  Carter got castigated for authorizing the abort that the military's own plan said should be called for when the number of working helicopters became too few.

The hostage situation was a failure to solve a pressing (public) problem.  A covert seal raid nobody knows anything about (or cares about) is a very different situation.  Failing to find and kill someone hiding from you is inherently different than not saving American Citizens who are flaunted on TV.     

[AmericanNation]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slquoIuPC8 no spin, all facts, documented, verified, witnessed, simple cold hard truth.  I would say I told you so, but I feel bad about it more than if I didn't know it was coming. It's like premonition guilt.

Niall Ferguson is not a valid source.

WOW, that's like saying "there is no such thing as a valid source."

There are much more reliable sources out there than an apologist for Imperial Germany and imperialism in general who believes in "Eurabia" and wants to privatise Social Security.

Plus, this is an example (different than a source) of virtually every non leftist/non Obama loving person in the world

Again, Niall Ferguson =/= "virtually every non leftist/non Obama loving person in the world."
Not even close.

predicting exactly what would happen as a result of BO's (lack of a) foreign policy throughout the entire timeline of events.

Again, this guy also believes in "Eurabia."

  I know this one of my fields of expertise,

The bar must be terribly low, then.

LOL!
you take an article entitled "Eurabia?" remove the question mark and pretend "he believes" and "he isn't credible." You just got caught completely overreaching.  If you're going to slander someone in order to discredit something unrelated (a morally questionable and intellectually lazy move), than at least make your fibbing plausible.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

   
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/04/magazine/04WWLN.html

[AmericanNation]

I Love how I'm arguing against people who think:

1)that Obama's obviously failed foreign policy (that importantly has been perfectly critiqued and criticized over the entire timeline of events) is no big deal.

2) BO's administration's naive/lying/incompetent response to the middle east going up in flames with a worrisome wave of anti-Americanism turned open waves of attacks executed with impunity.  ...is no big deal.

3) "Some hypothetical problem with a seal raid would be a cataclysmic political setback AND because of taking a POLITICAL risk (small/large/ whatever) we should fawn over this amazing leader who was brilliantly able to say "yea go ahead" on a golf course."              

The reality of # 1 & 2 is worse than your hypothetical #3 and you are pretending the reverse is true. 

[AmericanNation]

Regarding Niall Ferguson... well... http://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n21/pankaj-mishra/watch-this-man

Thanks for posting that.  Did you read the letters?  Mishra gets absolutely destroyed.  I think Burleigh and Shawcross perfectly summed up that amateurish review:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[AmericanNation]

Did you read the letters?

 

Yes I did. At the time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Um... no.

Ferguson, of course, threatened to sue Mishra over the review, but didn't seem to get round to it. Curious.

Mishra backed off almost every negative assertion (or was obviously discredited) in his review.  Thus, he discredited his initial amateurish review.  In academia that is what's called "getting destroyed" because the initial piece is reduced to no significance (nothingness--something to nothing = destroyed).     

[AmericanNation]

I Love how I'm arguing against people who think:

1)that Obama's obviously failed foreign policy (that importantly has been perfectly critiqued and criticized over the entire timeline of events) is no big deal.

2) BO's administration's naive/lying/incompetent response to the middle east going up in flames with a worrisome wave of anti-Americanism turned open waves of attacks executed with impunity.  ...is no big deal.

3) "Some hypothetical problem with a seal raid would be a cataclysmic political setback AND because of taking a POLITICAL risk (small/large/ whatever) we should fawn over this amazing leader who was brilliantly able to say "yea go ahead" on a golf course."              

The reality of # 1 & 2 is worse than your hypothetical #3 and you are pretending the reverse is true. 

Who's fawning? I think you're projecting something, AN.

Anyway, you're factually wrong; Libya likes America, and those thugs that attacked the embassy have all but been confirmed to have been either an extreme minority, or even outside groups. And Tunisia doesn't seem to have gone either way with hating or loving America. You are correct on Egypt, though. They definitely hate us more.

Never said they "hate" us, but many do, so either way I'm right, LOL.