Mr. President, who let them die?

[RockX]

Mr. President, who let them die?



Every time President Obama is asked why the U.S. embassy in Libya was denied its multiple requests for extra security at the Benghazi consulate before Sept. 11, he changes the subject. No wonder, as yesterday it was reported that not only were previous requests for extra security denied, but three additional requests on the night of the attack also were denied.


FOX News reported that the two former SEALS killed in the Benghazi raid had requested military support three times after reporting that the consulate was under attack. Their requests were denied by someone up the CIA chain of command. Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty rescued several personnel and recovered the body of diplomat Sean Smith from the consulate. At the CIA annex nearby, they came under mortar fire. Their request for a strike on the mortar site was denied. They were later killed by a mortar attack.


Who denied their request for assistance, and why? The families of those brave men deserve answers, as do the American people.

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20121027/LOCALVOICES/710279937

Mr. President, who let them die?


I wish all those attending his rallies would hold up signs asking this question. Since the MSM won’t ask, we the people must.

 

[Crashk]

House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012....Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.

Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security"

You get what you pay for.

 

[zappasguitar]

House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012....Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.

Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security"

You get what you pay for.

It's OBVIOUS to me that "small Government" Righties are to blame for the Benghazi attacks.

They demanded that the President make cuts to reduce the size of Government and 4 dead in Benghazi is the fallout.

 

[Disillusioned]

Kill hundreds of civilians in Pakistan, nobody notices. Be in office when four americans die, and HOT DAMN you're in trouble now!

 

[NOVA]

It's OBVIOUS to me that "small Government" Righties are to blame for the Benghazi attacks.

They demanded that the President make cuts to reduce the size of Government and 4 dead in Benghazi is the fallout.

What should be obvious is that it would cost next to nothing extra to post a small contingent of US military troops as security at dangerous
diplomatic locations where trouble is most likely to occur.....the marines have to be somewhere and the cost of their billeting doesn't drastically rise
with assignment......even the testimony, under oath, at the Congressional hearings revealed that funding WAS NOT a consideration in refusing the
extra security requested......so you 'blame' is misplaced and just shows your ignorance of the issue.....you're a partisan hack...