Protesters attack US diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya

[Peeperkorn]

Protesters attack US diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya
CNN - ‎50 minutes ago‎   
Cairo (CNN) -- Angry protesters attacked US diplomatic compounds in Libya and Egypt on Tuesday, citing in both instances an online film considered offensive to Islam.

Congratulations to all who supported the "Arab Spring".

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

an online film? zeesh. If we're going to get our embassies attacked over a movie it could at least be something that rakes it in at the box office.

[dead0man]

Protesters attack US diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya
CNN - ‎50 minutes ago‎   
Cairo (CNN) -- Angry protesters attacked US diplomatic compounds in Libya and Egypt on Tuesday, citing in both instances an online film considered offensive to Islam.

Congratulations to all who supported the "Arab Spring".

Yeah, cause nutter Muslims never protested outside Western embassies over stupid sh**t that "offended" them before the Arab Spring.

[dead0man]

This may be the movie they are freaking out over.

[dead0man]

U.S. Embassy Condemns Religious Incitement

You must be logged in to read this quote.

le sigh

[J. J.]

The Ambassador to Libya was murdered.  The consulate has reportedly been looted. 

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with."

Nicolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter XVII

http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince17.htm

[Zioneer]

Yes, because a crowd of crazies obviously constitutes the feelings of the entire country and invalidate that country's successful attempt to topple a tyrannical madman.

[J. J.]

Yes, because a crowd of crazies obviously constitutes the feelings of the entire country and invalidate that country's successful attempt to topple a tyrannical madman.

No, but it is an element within that country.  The Arab Spring has brought some storms, which might sweep away the flowers that bloomed.

[Link]

The Ambassador to Libya was murdered.  The consulate has reportedly been looted. 

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with."

Nicolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter XVII

http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince17.htm

I hope Republicans like you are NEVER in the White House again.  No wonder you guys hate Ron Paul so much.  After a senseless act like this all you can think of is adding fear to the mix.  There are plenty of majority Christian countries that do not have their embassies over run and their ambassadors murdered.  Wanna guess what the difference is?

[Silent Hunter]

Yes, because a crowd of crazies obviously constitutes the feelings of the entire country and invalidate that country's successful attempt to topple a tyrannical madman.

[J. J.]

I hope Republicans like you are NEVER in the White House again.  No wonder you guys hate Ron Paul so much.  After a senseless act like this all you can think of is adding fear to the mix.  There are plenty of majority Christian countries that do not have their embassies over run and their ambassadors murdered.  Wanna guess what the difference is?

Yes, were are bigger target and we are not feared.  I hope that people like you never hold public office in the US.

I absolutely want anyone thinking about attacking a US embassy or murdering a US ambassador to fear the consequences of doing so.  I want them to fear those consequences so much, that they won't do it.   

[Earthling]

So, eight years of Iraq and eleven years Afghanistan didn't teach you anything?

[J. J.]

So, eight years of Iraq and eleven years Afghanistan didn't teach you anything?

Yes, that being "loved" ultimately does not work.

Remember all those folks who said that elected Obama would be so great for the rest of the world?  Well, since Jimmy Carter, no US ambassador has ever been assassinated, until yesterday.  That alone will not do it.

Now, that said, Obama has done a fairly good job about taking out those people that do things like this in Afghanistan and Yemen.  Now, this does not mean sending in an occupation force, but it does mean being more robust in doing similar things in Libya (and perhaps being better prepared for the aftermath).

Being loved and feared is better, and possible.

[anvi]

U.S. Embassy Condemns Religious Incitement

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I really fail to see what is objectionable about this original tweet, even if it had not been authorized, and I don't see how it constitutes an "apology."  The embassy in Cairo was attacked for something that it neither did nor represented.  And they were probably pretty freaked out by the attack in the initial aftermath, and they are housed in a country with a big Muslim population.  What were they supposed to say: "Dear citizens of Cairo, we happen to think that this online film was really cool, and we honor freedom of speech, and if you don't like it, go f yourselves"?  What, furthermore, is apologetic about the sentence: "Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy"?  Trying to make political hay out of that is just dipsh**ttery, especially from someone who wants to be president and who will have a diplomatic core to protect.    

[Earthling]

So, eight years of Iraq and eleven years Afghanistan didn't teach you anything?

Yes, that being "loved" ultimately does not work.

Remember all those folks who said that elected Obama would be so great for the rest of the world?  Well, since Jimmy Carter, no US ambassador has ever been assassinated, until yesterday.  That alone will not do it.

Now, that said, Obama has done a fairly good job about taking out those people that do things like this in Afghanistan and Yemen.  Now, this does not mean sending in an occupation force, but it does mean being more robust in doing similar things in Libya (and perhaps being better prepared for the aftermath).

Being loved and feared is better, and possible.

Extremists don't fear the United States. They are prepared to die while attacking it.
There is not much that any president can do about that. You can try to stop attacks, and most times, the US succeeds in doing that, but stopping all of them? That is just not possible.

Iraq and Afghanistan are prime examples of that. America showed strength and the extremists did not back down.

[rwoy]

The important questions here are:

1) Where were Egyptian and Libyan security forces?

2) What action will be taken by the Libyan government to find the murderers of the US Ambassador?

[Zioneer]

The important questions here are:

1) Where were Egyptian and Libyan security forces?

2) What action will be taken by the Libyan government to find the murderers of the US Ambassador?

1) Most reports say that the Libyan security forces tried to protect the embassy/consulate, but were unsuccessful in stopping the rioters.

2) The Libyan government isn't in the pay of these thugs, so they'll probably go to great lengths to find the killers.

[Link]

The Ambassador to Libya was murdered.  The consulate has reportedly been looted. 

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with."

Nicolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter XVII

http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince17.htm

I hope Republicans like you are NEVER in the White House again.  No wonder you guys hate Ron Paul so much.  After a senseless act like this all you can think of is adding fear to the mix.  There are plenty of majority Christian countries that do not have their embassies over run and their ambassadors murdered.  Wanna guess what the difference is?

Yes, were are bigger target and we are not feared.  I hope that people like you never hold public office in the US.

I absolutely want anyone thinking about attacking a US embassy or murdering a US ambassador to fear the consequences of doing so.  I want them to fear those consequences so much, that they won't do it.   

Do you get the paper where you live?  These people don't fear death.  What other "consequences" do you have in your bag of tricks?

[dead0man]

The important questions here are:

1) Where were Egyptian and Libyan security forces?

2) What action will be taken by the Libyan government to find the murderers of the US Ambassador?

1.From what I've read and heard, the Egyptian security forces mostly stood around and watched.  The Libyan forces fought their asses off, but the attack there wasn't just a bunch of useful idiots standing around chanting and burning flags, it was more of a military raid.

2.Hopefully, and with the assistance of western agencies, they will bust their ass to get to the bottom of it and the guilty will pay one way or the other.

[J. J.]

Extremists don't fear the United States. They are prepared to die while attacking it.
There is not much that any president can do about that. You can try to stop attacks, and most times, the US succeeds in doing that, but stopping all of them? That is just not possible.

Iraq and Afghanistan are prime examples of that. America showed strength and the extremists did not back down.

The US did not show strength in the years prior to 9/11/01.  They have to understand that not only will they die, but what they hold dear will die with them. 

Egypt was not exactly that.  It was not an assault, but the apology message didn't help.

The important questions here are:

1) Where were Egyptian and Libyan security forces?

2) What action will be taken by the Libyan government to find the murderers of the US Ambassador?

1) Most reports say that the Libyan security forces tried to protect the embassy/consulate, but were unsuccessful in stopping the rioters.

2) The Libyan government isn't in the pay of these thugs, so they'll probably go to great lengths to find the killers.

PP, I think that is the correct point.  It was not the Libyan government and probably not a majority of the Libyan people.

[Likely Voter]

A lot of things are being conflated out there. The two incidents were very different. In Egypt there seems to be the proverbial angry mob of Islamists (and not a big one compared to other protests seen in Egypt), and before that mob did anything some social media guy inside the embassy sent out a somewhat lame tweet and statement. Then the mob scaled the walls and tore down the flag, which was then condemned by the embassy. And the local security forces didn't do much to stop. It was a total screwup by everyone, but in the end no one was hurt.

What happened at the Libyan consulate now looks to be an organized attack by Al Queda or some other terrorist group. They were well armed, including RPGs. Libyan security forces joined the US Marines in fighting back the attack and the Libyan goverment condemned the attack, but a US ambassador and 3 other Americans died.

Today Mitt Romney seems to be trying to tie that first panicked tweet from some guy in the surrounded Egyptian embassy to be how the Obama Admin sided with the terrorists who killed the Americans in Libya. That is just disgusting and will only backfire.

[opebo]

Being loved and feared is better, and possible.

Extremists don't fear the United States. They are prepared to die while attacking it.
There is not much that any president can do about that. You can try to stop attacks, and most times, the US succeeds in doing that, but stopping all of them? That is just not possible.

Earthling's right, J.J., you can't make them 'fear' the US, in any sense which would dissuade them.  Embassies have to be defended by having first (and most importantly) a high level of influence over or ability to rely upon the host country State and security forces, and secondly very effective embassy security.  

Personally I think it would be a very good idea - perhaps it would eventually be a necessity - to relocate embassies in Muslim countries to isolated areas well outside the city, where approach by anyone could be better monitored, with checkpoints, large US-controlled 'grounds', kill-zones, etc.  Think of something like a cross between the current embassy in Baghdad and the Green Zone.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

That is just disgusting and will only backfire.

It will only backfire if pubs don't show up at the polls, and with a few indys....and in my view the pubs hate Obama enough to show up regardless.

[opebo]

That is just disgusting and will only backfire.

It will only backfire if pubs don't show up at the polls, and with a few indys....and in my view the pubs hate Obama enough to show up regardless.

Yes, I don't think this will backfire - it is a very effective strategy for Romney against Obama, who has tremendous weakness - even more than a typical Democrat (due to being perceived as black and Muslim) - in the area of 'foreign policy'.  This embassy killing could very well tip the election back in Romney's favor.

[Likely Voter]

The Obama is a Muslim sympathizer thing is something isolated to the far right. Polling has consistently shown that voters give Obama the edge in the issues of national security, dealing with terrorism and foreign policy. This has only increased since the DNC where the Dems made national security, killing Osama and the troops a centerpiece of their final night and Romney didn't even mention the war.

And in times of international crisis there is always a rallying of the flag. Just look at how popular Bush got after 9/11, less than a year after many Dems were convinced he stole an election. And many forget how Carter got a flag rallying effect at the beginning of the Iran hostage thing that only dissipated after it dragged on for a year.

To attack POTUS before they have even named all the dead is just craven and is not sitting well. Note how little support Romney is getting from Republicans outside Limbaugh, Palin and Gingrich types.

This was not a time for Romney to play to his hard core base. The middle gets turned off by that