It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Following the riots at the American embassy in Cairo and at the U.S. Consulate in Libya, where our ambassador to the war-torn country was murdered by what is reported to have been a calculated attack, our administration had a duty to respond. Not only had our flag been desecrated and four of our own been murdered, but it was done on the most symbolic and somber of days.
Unfortunately, the reaction from the White House was anything but firm. Though it distanced itself from the embassy's weak initial response that sympathized with the rioters and expressed sadness "senseless" acts, it failed to accomplish what a nation under attack should.
It instead allowed the Obama campaign to respond first, slamming Romney for his statement. Then, rather than pledge retribution out of the gate, the White House responded with a statement that was limp and lacking in outrage. Said the President: "While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants."
Why didn’t the White House warn Egypt it would cut off funding or worse? Obama missed his Reagan moment in a national crisis. His remarks seemed canned. Even Secretary of State Clinton showed more resolve, yet even she appeared in denial when she denounced the attacks as being from a small mob.
Since taking office, the President has refrained from using the terms “war on terrorism” or “radical Islamic terrorism."
Originally posted by RealSpoke
So you're blaming the whole country of Egypt/Libya on the few that attacked the embassy's?
It's sort of like saying we should go to war and occupy Afghanistan because some militants hijacked a plane and crashed it into the towers.
So you're blaming the whole country of Egypt/Libya on the few that attacked the embassy's?
It's sort of like saying we should go to war and occupy Afghanistan because some militants hijacked a plane and crashed it into the towers. I don't even get the logic behind these types of thoughts. They must come from bloodthirsty people because it doesn't compute in my brain.
Originally posted by thepresident
Obama should blow up all 15 nations that have people protesting!
They are taking away your freedoms!
S+Fedit on 16-9-2012 by thepresident because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by RealSpoke
So you're blaming the whole country of Egypt/Libya on the few that attacked the embassy's?
“Our capital shall not be Cairo, Mecca or Medina. It shall be Jerusalem with God’s will. Our chants shall be: ‘millions of martyrs will march towards Jerusalem’,” prominent cleric Safwat Hagazy said, according to the video aired by Egypt’s religious Annas TV on Tuesday.
“The United States of the Arabs will be restored on the hands of that man [Mursi] and his supporters. The capital of the [Muslim] Caliphate will be Jerusalem with God’s will,” Hegazy said, as the crowds cheered, waving the Egyptian flags along with the flags of the Islamist Hamas group, which rules the Gaza Strip.
Originally posted by cartenz
reply to post by sonnny1
The war on terrorism is a farce. Why would you want more bloodshed? Too many have already lost their lives fighting for this lie, why send more to their deaths?
If anything, shouldn't you be asking: 'Why hasn't Obama ENDED the war on terrorism?"
Most of the Americans we lost that day had never considered the possibility that a small band of terrorists halfway around the world could do us such harm.
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by sonnny1
I don't get what you want to do. You want to declare war on Egypt because some militants attacked the embassy?
Why? You like to kill people? Support the military industrial complex? Destroy whole nations?