U.S. Presidential race - Democrat Discussion

[belfpala]

Isn't it illegal to accept any foreign campaign donation, and that was briefly an "issue" with Romney's London and Israel trip?

Looked it up... yes. http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml

[Grizzly Willy]

Yep. I would expect - sorry, that's bit too optimistic - hope that there would be an inquiry into the Romney's foreign funds issue in order to maintain consistency. Although, I'm sure that parties aren't going to start hurting their horses this close to the election, so this isn't going to go anywhere unless their opponents push hard enough and find a legitimate fault that raises enough attention.

[Naxere]

Well I think they don't have to disclose any donors under $200. I do find it amusing that:

The campaign website immediately accepted the contribution even though it was made from a Pakistani IP address and despite the nonexistent street name and city information.

An automated email was immediately sent from Rufus Gifford, national finance director of Obama for America, thanking “Osama” for the contribution. The email contained a note that said, “There may be a minor delay in the processing of your contribution as it will be subject to review.” However, “Osama bin Laden’s” foreign donation evidently passed the Obama campaign’s “review.”

[Bobdoletoo]

Is him not doing enouph more than a mistake? It's pretty clear it was a mistake 3 weeks ago. What else is there?[COLOR="red"]

I think it is more then a mistake. Is him not doing enough when he could have saved American lives just a mistake? They asked for help and were denied help during a multi hour fight. Is it just a mistake?

[ptwonline]

I think it is more then a mistake. Is him not doing enough when he could have saved American lives just a mistake? They asked for help and were denied help during a multi hour fight. Is it just a mistake?

Why not ask the guys who actually made the decision: General Ham, General Dempsey, and the Secretary of Defense? Sec Panetta has already explained publicly who made the call, and it wasn't Obama. Obama didn't block them. The military did not send support because they didn't have enough info. They didn't want a bunch more dead Americans if it was a trap.

[Bobdoletoo]

Why not ask the guys who actually made the decision: General Ham, General Dempsey, and the Secretary of Defense? Sec Panetta has already explained publicly who made the call, and it wasn't Obama. Obama didn't block them. The military did not send support because they didn't have enough info. They didn't want a bunch more dead Americans if it was a trap.

Except that they asked for help several times. Except that a navy seal had a mortar targeted with a laser for a guided missile and nothing happened. What info do you need? Why would he do that if he was not expecting a missile to hit the target?

And you are saying that the commander in chief does not make these calls? Only his military advisers?

So let me get this straight. When it is saving American lives, it is military advisers who make the call. When it is killing certain terrorists, it is obama's call.

[ptwonline]

Except that they asked for help several times. Except that a navy seal had a mortar targeted with a laser for a guided missile and nothing happened. What info do you need? Why would he do that if he was not expecting a missile to hit the target?

And you are saying that the commander in chief does not make these calls? Only his military advisers?

That's their job. Perhaps the President makes the call on certain things with very large implications--like, say, a raid into Pakistan to get Bin Laden--but for the most part you would not expect the President to make that call. That's why he has a Secretary of Defense. That's why the Sec of Defense has Generals and Admirals. And quite frankly, if sending in more troops was sending them into an ambush to die, the people making the decision would be facing massive criticism for making rash decisions that cost American lives, and we'd be hearing words around the decision like "obvious" and "anyone else would know better" and so forth...similar to the perfect hindsight criticism we are hearing now.

[Bobdoletoo]

That's their job. Perhaps the President makes the call on certain things with very large implications--like, say, a raid into Pakistan to get Bin Laden--but for the most part you would not expect the President to make that call. That's why he has a Secretary of Defense. That's why the Sec of Defense has Generals and Admirals. And quite frankly, if sending in more troops was sending them into an ambush to die, the people making the decision would be facing massive criticism for making rash decisions that cost American lives, and we'd be hearing words around the decision like "obvious" and "anyone else would know better" and so forth...similar to the perfect hindsight criticism we are hearing now.

Don't understand how shooting a laser guided missile would be walking into an ambush.

Got it. President makes calls to kill certain terrorists, not all. And let's others make call to save American lives. Only commander in chief when he wants. Got it.

By the way, if that is their job, why exactly do they need the President to be commander in chief?

[belfpala]

Don't understand how shooting a laser guided missile would be walking into an ambush.

When not everyone involved in the protest was part of the attack? Yeah, good luck.

[Bobdoletoo]

When not everyone involved in the protest was part of the attack? Yeah, good luck.

Show me any link that there was a protest in Benghazi. They saw the attack in real time and saw no protest.

Laser guided missiles are precise, they are LASER guided and it was aimed at the mortars shelling the complex.

[Sunseeker]

Don't understand how shooting a laser guided missile would be walking into an ambush.

I'm kinda curious which laser-guided missile you have in mind that wouldn't have blown up the entire building.

By the way, if that is their job, why exactly do they need the President to be commander in chief?

Big decisions. Going to war, police actions, ect..

[stumpy]

Don't understand how shooting a laser guided missile would be walking into an ambush.

I hear hand grenades are ideal for defusing hostage situations too.

[belfpala]

Show me any link that there was a protest in Benghazi. They saw the attack in real time and saw no protest.

Show me a link there was a guided missile in place, and then show me a link showing it wouldn't have either a) killed our people collaterally, or b) killed civilian libyans the same way.

[Bobdoletoo]

I'm kinda curious which laser-guided missile you have in mind that wouldn't have blown up the entire building.

The mortars were firing into the consulate. How would you fire a mortar inside a building?

Big decisions. Going to war, police actions, ect..

Saving American lives not on that list?

---------- Post added 2012-10-29 at 11:06 PM ----------

Show me a link there was a guided missile in place, and then show me a link showing it wouldn't have either a) killed our people collaterally, or b) killed civilian libyans the same way.

Do you honestly think a missile hitting mortars firing into the consulate would hit the consulate? Seriously?

[Sunseeker]

The mortars were firing into the consulate. How would you fire a mortar inside a building?

Again...laser-guided missiles are BIG weapons. Okay, you blow up a mortar...and the adjacent three homes. Great...we saved 4 Americans at the expense of...several dozen people hiding in their homes. That sounds like a wonderful trade, no wonder people love America.

Saving American lives not on that list?

Oh shove your rhetoric.

[Bobdoletoo]

Again...laser-guided missiles are BIG weapons. Okay, you blow up a mortar...and the adjacent three homes. Great...we saved 4 Americans at the expense of...several dozen people hiding in their homes. That sounds like a wonderful trade, no wonder people love America.


Oh shove your rhetoric.

Make up your mind, what is he commander in chief of? It's not rhetoric if you want to make certain people take certain blame. Where does the buck stop?

I am also pretty sure the American military can make strategic hits with laser guided missiles. NOt like drones who accidentally kill American citizens.

[Juno86]

Make up your mind, what is he commander in chief of? It's not rhetoric if you want to make certain people take certain blame. Where does the buck stop?

I am also pretty sure the American military can make strategic hits with laser guided missiles. NOt like drones who accidentally kill American citizens.

Holy crap. Are you honestly this short sighted to try and blame Obama for EVERY little thing that happened during his administration? PS. You've given ZERO link's to back up a THING you have said from a reliable source, if you have no source, if you have no way to show your work you can NOT be taken seriously.

[Felya]

It's not rhetoric if you want to make certain people take certain blame.

That's exactly what rhetoric is, with your exaggerated claims, simply to blame certain people. Look up what rhetoric means, if it wasn't rhetoric, you'd be fine with it just being a mistake.

---------- Post added 2012-10-30 at 05:25 AM ----------

Holy crap. Are you honestly this short sighted to try and blame Obama for EVERY little thing that happened during his administration? PS. You've given ZERO link's to back up a THING you have said from a reliable source, if you have no source, if you have no way to show your work you can NOT be taken seriously.

It doesn't mater, this is about certain people getting blamed. Nothing else...

[Slammin Shaman]

Holy crap. Are you honestly this short sighted to try and blame Obama for EVERY little thing that happened during his administration? PS. You've given ZERO link's to back up a THING you have said from a reliable source, if you have no source, if you have no way to show your work you can NOT be taken seriously.

He just likes to throw out accusations with no facts. If we defend Obama, it's because we're biased. It's better to ignore him because his "intilligent" remarks are mediocre at best.

Bob, Military 101. President doesn't over-see and make every decision for fights. In circumstances where a split-second decision has to be made on the field, it's the commanding officer in the area.

[belfpala]

Bob, Military 101. President doesn't over-see and make every decision for fights. In circumstances where a split-second decision has to be made on the field, it's the commanding officer in the area.

I don't believe you. The real world is just like Chess, and the President should be able to control every pawn at all times.

(I'm kidding.)