224 died in embassy bombings in 1998 until Clinton.
12 or so attacks occured on Bush’s watch.
Carter of course had the Iranian crisis.
It seems no one we elect to the Presidency recently has any business being in a position of leadership, except George H. W. Bush. Only one attack during his term that I could find.
Do you honestly think that you’re being persuasive? You should actually engage when your arguments are taken apart, instead you change the subject.
I was insulted twice… twelve and thirteen!
And you used a smiley, that’s fourteen.
And I’m just going to throw sixteen in there for good measure.
More bad analogies. Sorry you don’t get it.
Anyone care to guess the difference it makes yet? What sets this episode apart from the others you mentioned in bad analogy with associated illogical thinking?
Anyone?
Let’s throw in the Khobar Towers and U.S.S. Cole while we’re at it. I’m more than happy to help you along. Just want make sure we dig the hole deep enough to bury it real good…
Punctuate much? At least you’ve stopped talking about killing Obama. At least, on these boards, that is.
Rhetorical questions, that’s seventeen, twenty, and sixty-nine.
I believe the immediate subject in that case led to the BBQ pit, to which I was responding.
Why you toddle on over there and have your fun?
They aren’t analogies, it’s the application of your own metric for leadership.
Nothing says “Great Debates” like guessing what point someone’s trying to make.
Obama, Osama, what difference does it make?
None, if you don’t think about it.
I’m painting an impressionist image of a viewpoint on Benghazi for dummies. You don’t have to look at it. The horse has been led to water.
One side of this debate shifted to basically resisting multi-pronged forays into fallacious and illogical thinking purporting thinly veiled justification for State Department-sponsored ineptitude and incompetence. If you don’t get why refusing security requests from the ambassador in Libya constitutes bald-faced ineptitude and incompetence I’m not going to explain it to you. It is only regrettable that criminal culpability cannot be assigned for obvious political reasons.
Maybe the mods now move it the mundane pointless? Dunno.
Duh, one’s from Saudi Arabia, the other’s from Kenya.
You never answered my question about Reagan.
Details, please! (I’m not holding my breath)
He wants the Republicans in Congress prosecuted for reducing Department of State budgets and reducing authorizations for security expenditures. But Hilary and O[del] s [/del]bama are preventing it.
Right?
So you admit to trying to paint a picture that amounts to: “See what you want to see”, vs, “See exactly what there is”.
Acewiza, your behavior in this thread is insulting to other posters. In post #260 I specifically told people to calm it down and behave. You have failed to do so.
I’m issuing a warning for you for failing to follow a moderator’s instructions. Please participate in the debate without the insults.
A mistake which I acknowledged at the end of that post but was unable to edit once it had been submitted. That said, I do recommend that you take a look at it as you might learn how to properly use the words you have been throwing about. Or, if you feel I am incorrect in my understanding as to how to use them, then I welcome you there to correct me.
And to think, you were concerned that I was getting in the way of the “substance” of the debate.
Your accusations of fallacious arguments have been refuted.
In 1983, weeks before the barracks bombing, Iran warned of retaliation for those who aided Iran’s enemies.
The U.S. received a detailed warning of a plot to bomb Kenyan embassies, months in advance of the attacks.
The U.S. also received a warning of the 2004 attack in Jeddah, and was unable to prevent 10 people from being gunned down.
Months before the Iranian hostage crisis, the embassy had been occupied and the staff held hostage, a preview of what was to come, and the embassy was left open.
Again, none of our leaders seem to live up to your standards.
It’s certainly been pointless.
Your Warning for direct insults was issued after you had posted this additional snark, so you get a pass on this one, but this sort of sniping makes no case for your continued participation on this board.
Back it off.
[ /Moderating ]