Maybe from a handful of sporadic protestors but I really don’t see how it protects an embassy from a planned attack. A few days poses no obstacle toward that goal.
Of course it does – it gives the attackers a few days to cool off, and the defenders a few days to get readier.
Mango only pawn in game of life.
Of course! Candygrams! Those Godless fiends!
And its “Mongo”. A “mango” is a fruit. Mongo straight.
Mongo doth protest too much.
In relation to Israel and aQ, you’re not doing a bad job yourself!
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t. If Obama didn’t close the embassies and there was a terrorist attack, he’d be blamed for not taking precautions. Now he is accused for wrong doing because he is taking precautions. Stupid Americans.
Spot the industrial-scale mischaracterisation.
No, AQ hasn’t launched many attacks on Israel. But then, it hasn’t launched many attacks on U.S. soil over the past 12 years, either. Al-Qaeda prefers to operate in areas where it has some base of power (such as Muslim countries), or places with reduced security. The U.S. and Israel are just too much of a challenge for it.
That said, according to its own stated goals, the organization is just as hostile toward Israel as it is toward the U.S. If it had a strike force in Tel Aviv, and the embassy was closed, chances are that the force with choose to attack some high-value Israeli target instead.
See, others might think AQ is actually focused on countries where western influence is of most concern - like Yemen.
But I understand you have your own narrative to protect and propagate.
And I suppose you have yours.
It’s true- the West has a lot of influence on New York, and Washington and London and Madrid.
But why does everyone think Mango is the homo-gay?!
Protesters might cool off but an organization like Al Qaeda would not.
As far as ramping up security that would certainly make sense except for one detail. This is not a new event or close to a new event. The countries listed should be as hardened as practicable.
But you can’t keep that up for very long, or you’ll find yourself spending more on dog food than on chicken feed, to belabor the metaphor.
You’re really very good at shooting yourself in the foot.
The list of closures represents a broad brush application of nations that have groups violently opposed to the United States. It’s nothing new. The security issues at these embassies should have been addressed years ago. A couple of days would not begin to address any faults that exist.
Maybe you’d like to explain what “focused” means to you.
You’ve obviously already made up your mind that this is an Evil Plot By Obama, but I’ll play nonetheless. What can be done to protect an embassy from a truck bomb, other than closing it?