nat4900
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2015
- 42,021
- 5,965
I'd ask "objective" right wingers (a task that may be akin to asking for a virgin at a Reno brothel) to, at least, simply contemplate two issues that don't seem to ever make the headlines or asked by the talking head pundits on the Benghazi issue...
First, as harsh as it may sound, shouldn't ambassador Stevens deserve SOME responsibility for placing himself and those poor 3 other Americans directly in harm's way? I mean, there was relative "safety" back in Tripoli, yet Stevens chose to travel 400 miles to Benghazi, throwing himself into a situation that, by all accounts, was highly volatile.
Second, the question that an objective observer would (and should) ask, is what possible RATIONALE would there be for Hillary Clinton to deliberately place an ambassador into harm's way? I mean, its not like Hillary was going to take herself into Benghazi....all she had to do is ask for help from the military, CIA, etc.
The implication that highly partisan right wingers seem to want to make, is that Hillary actually PLANNED for Stevens' demise......Exactly what was there to be GAINED by Hillary's so-called "refusal" to send help to Stevens?
Addressing those two issues.......objectively....can maybe help to separate the subjective partisanship from the blatant witch hunt.
First, as harsh as it may sound, shouldn't ambassador Stevens deserve SOME responsibility for placing himself and those poor 3 other Americans directly in harm's way? I mean, there was relative "safety" back in Tripoli, yet Stevens chose to travel 400 miles to Benghazi, throwing himself into a situation that, by all accounts, was highly volatile.
Second, the question that an objective observer would (and should) ask, is what possible RATIONALE would there be for Hillary Clinton to deliberately place an ambassador into harm's way? I mean, its not like Hillary was going to take herself into Benghazi....all she had to do is ask for help from the military, CIA, etc.
The implication that highly partisan right wingers seem to want to make, is that Hillary actually PLANNED for Stevens' demise......Exactly what was there to be GAINED by Hillary's so-called "refusal" to send help to Stevens?
Addressing those two issues.......objectively....can maybe help to separate the subjective partisanship from the blatant witch hunt.