Anit-American violence sweeps across 23 world nations

DVSentinel · Sep 18, 2012

Klown said:
Did the USA offer to at least pay for the coffins of the 1.4 million Iraq civilians that have been slaughtered since 2003

And while I have your attention - appproximately 90% of the Iraqi oil is in the hands of US corporations such as EXXON

Take a million with one hand and give out crumbs with the other -

Did the US kill 1.4 million Iraqi civilians? No. In fact, even if your number is correct, the vast majority of them were killed by other Iraqis seeking dominance and control. The Shia and the Sunni have been fighting each other for centuries. Are we responsible for the actions taken by these individuals? NO. If you really want to point fingers at someone over the violence there, then start with Syria and Iran who have been funneling weapons, fighters and support to those doing the violence, not the US which has been making efforts to stop the violence.

Is there an Iraqi owned multi-national oil company? Did they have the resources to put out the fires and rebuild the infrastructure necessary to exploit the resources there? Since companies in the US were the first to intentionally drill for oil and make useful products out of it, and were the only source of them for many years, then yes, we may have more oil companies registered in the US than elsewhere.

Since you claim that US owned corporations control 90% of the oil there, do you have any data that actually supports that claim and a break down of everyone involved in the oil industry in Iraq?

MMC · Sep 18, 2012

DVSentinel said:
We have the policy of "freedom of speech" . In that, that is our policy, then yes, it did affect the protests. Since almost any printed or video material can be found to offensive to someone, we don't restrict the publishing of "offensive" materials. The protesters seem to feel that our policy of allowing individuals to produce "offensive" materials that are offensive to Islam is wrong. However, if we extended "protection" to Islam, then we would have to extend the same protections for all religions. Some do not understand this and assume we would extend protections to their religion because of course, their religion is the right one, otherwise it wouldn't be their religion.

It has not helped that, at least in some areas, the Imams and others have been telling their followers that the movie was actually produced by the US and Israel, indicating that the governments sponsored it instead of the government just not censoring it.

I do not have a problem with the peaceful protesters either. I do have a problem with the security policies for our embassies and consulates in some of these area, especially unstable areas with a long history of violent protest against the US and in countries, like Egypt, where the government is not fully established nor does it have a adequate security force of it's own. In these cases, the US should provide our Embassies, Consulates, and other facilities with adequate security forces, with ROE that allows them to actually do their job of protecting the facility. That includes meeting violence with violence, something that we are better at. At locations where the local government is willing and able to counter the mobs, then by all means, let them. However, we should still have security forces in place, even in those locations, to do the job ourselves if necessary. A show of weakness or lack of resolve only encourages more to become involved with the violence. As far as disparity between participants, well, if they are dumb enough to bring a knife to a gunfight, they pretty much get what the deserve.

Agreed, I think had an article up where the Teachers in Pakistan were telling the kids to go to the Protests and to go and Protest America and Israel. The one kid they interviewed was 12yrs old. Think they are reinforcing anything that is the truth about the situation? Then to top it off most of their Religious Leaders don't go and try to calm the unrest. They sit back and incite it more. Those that do speak are very far and few.

Myself if they wanted to make progress they would be talking about such on their Media broadcasting stations, radio stations and in their News. They don't instead it is to push Anti American Sentiment onto their youth and next generations.

Sarcogito · Sep 18, 2012

DVSentinel said:
I do not have a problem with the peaceful protesters either. I do have a problem with the security policies for our embassies and consulates in some of these area, especially unstable areas with a long history of violent protest against the US and in countries, like Egypt, where the government is not fully established nor does it have a adequate security force of it's own. In these cases, the US should provide our Embassies, Consulates, and other facilities with adequate security forces, with ROE that allows them to actually do their job of protecting the facility. That includes meeting violence with violence, something that we are better at. At locations where the local government is willing and able to counter the mobs, then by all means, let them. However, we should still have security forces in place, even in those locations, to do the job ourselves if necessary. A show of weakness or lack of resolve only encourages more to become involved with the violence. As far as disparity between participants, well, if they are dumb enough to bring a knife to a gunfight, they pretty much get what the deserve.

It isn’t as simple as that for an embassy to bring in more of its own security forces on a permanent basis. Embassies (not just American ones) are capped at how many personnel they can have assigned. That cap is set by the host country. For every additional security person you add, be it a Marine or Diplomatic Security Officer, you will have to give up a Foreign Service or attaché position. The FSOs and attaches are the ones doing the work of diplomacy. As you increase the security and reduce the number of FSOs and attaches, you reduce the ability of the embassy to actually do its job. You end up with a fortress for the sake of being a fortress.

Now if you want to talk about making the structures more secure or flat out closing missions in areas you feel are too dangerous, ok. But there is always going to be balance between security and being able to do one’s job. There is an inherent risk in working at an embassy. There is a reason we get hazardous duty pay in countries like that. I am all for strong security, but if it is done to the point we can’t do our jobs effectively, then there is no point in being there. Personally, I would like to see the US offer more training to the host country security forces who protect the embassies. And that wouldn’t affect an embassy’s manning.

MMC · Sep 18, 2012

Sarcogito said:
It isn’t as simple as that for an embassy to bring in more of its own security forces on a permanent basis. Embassies (not just American ones) are capped at how many personnel they can have assigned. That cap is set by the host country. For every additional security person you add, be it a Marine or Diplomatic Security Officer, you will have to give up a Foreign Service or attaché position. The FSOs and attaches are the ones doing the work of diplomacy. As you increase the security and reduce the number of FSOs and attaches, you reduce the ability of the embassy to actually do its job. You end up with a fortress for the sake of being a fortress.

Now if you want to talk about making the structures more secure or flat out closing missions in areas you feel are too dangerous, ok. But there is always going to be balance between security and being able to do one’s job. There is an inherent risk in working at an embassy. There is a reason we get hazardous duty pay in countries like that. I am all for strong security, but if it is done to the point we can’t do our jobs effectively, then there is no point in being there. Personally, I would like to see the US offer more training to the host country security forces who protect the embassies. And that wouldn’t affect an embassy’s manning.

Why not Regionalize the Embassies.....One main Embassies for certain Regions of the Planet. Thats where the Buisness is conducted and maintained. Due to the times and technologies there is no need for the waste to have Embassies and Consulates in all of these Countries. No need to have the travel and expenses for all that such entails. Security, Personell, and of course a bit more transparency with the Media.

washunut · Sep 18, 2012

Sarcogito said:
It isn’t as simple as that for an embassy to bring in more of its own security forces on a permanent basis. Embassies (not just American ones) are capped at how many personnel they can have assigned. That cap is set by the host country. For every additional security person you add, be it a Marine or Diplomatic Security Officer, you will have to give up a Foreign Service or attaché position. The FSOs and attaches are the ones doing the work of diplomacy. As you increase the security and reduce the number of FSOs and attaches, you reduce the ability of the embassy to actually do its job. You end up with a fortress for the sake of being a fortress.

Now if you want to talk about making the structures more secure or flat out closing missions in areas you feel are too dangerous, ok. But there is always going to be balance between security and being able to do one’s job. There is an inherent risk in working at an embassy. There is a reason we get hazardous duty pay in countries like that. I am all for strong security, but if it is done to the point we can’t do our jobs effectively, then there is no point in being there. Personally, I would like to see the US offer more training to the host country security forces who protect the embassies. And that wouldn’t affect an embassy’s manning.

It seems pretty stupid for that guy in Libya NOT to be in the embassy in the capital on 9/11. Just another incompetent move by Clinton as secretary of state.

Sarcogito · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
Why not Regionalize the Embassies.....One main Embassies for certain Regions of the Planet. Thats where the Buisness is conducted and maintained. Due to the times and technologies there is no need for the waste to have Embassies and Consulates in all of these Countries. No need to have the travel and expenses for all that such entails. Security, Personell, and of course a bit more transparency with the Media.

But the business of diplomacy is not done inside the embassies and consulates. Sure, we get our paperwork done there, but the meetings are done in the myriad of government buildings that belong to the host country. Just like foreign diplomats in DC attend meetings at the White House, Capital Building, Pentagon, and the facilities of private enterprise, so do we in our countries of assignment.

And the primary purpose of a consulate in MOST countries is to prove services to its own citizens and visas to host country nationals. Benghazi is an oddball in that regard. If you lose your passport how are you going to travel to a regional embassy if it isn’t in the country you are located in?

I’m all for more transparency though.

washunut · Sep 18, 2012

Sarcogito said:
But the business of diplomacy is not done inside the embassies and consulates. Sure, we get our paperwork done there, but the meetings are done in the myriad of government buildings that belong to the host country. Just like foreign diplomats in DC attend meetings at the White House, Capital Building, Pentagon, and the facilities of private enterprise, so do we in our countries of assignment.

And the primary purpose of a consulate in MOST countries is to prove services to its own citizens and visas to host country nationals. Benghazi is an oddball in that regard. If you lose your passport how are you going to travel to a regional embassy if it isn’t in the country you are located in?

I’m all for more transparency though.

How about using common sense on 9/11? Never heard this guy called a genius by another just a amiable off.

MMC · Sep 18, 2012

Sarcogito said:
But the business of diplomacy is not done inside the embassies and consulates. Sure, we get our paperwork done there, but the meetings are done in the myriad of government buildings that belong to the host country. Just like foreign diplomats in DC attend meetings at the White House, Capital Building, Pentagon, and the facilities of private enterprise, so do we in our countries of assignment.

And the primary purpose of a consulate in MOST countries is to prove services to its own citizens and visas to host country nationals. Benghazi is an oddball in that regard. If you lose your passport how are you going to travel to a regional embassy if it isn’t in the country you are located in?

I’m all for more transparency though.

Yet all you describe could be done in area that would regionalize those Embassies. Private Enterprize could be within the domain. Moreover those in other countries would also have to provide expense and set their areas up as to their Culture. Also some countries may not want be but ameneities could be provided. Means Host nations would have their people actually working together to build something for all.....together. See the that which they have accomplished.

On the Issue of providing services. Perhaps those NFP's that are in those countires could be doing some of that work. Myself I wouldnt have an answer for that on the issueing of Visas other than it may take more time. Which then would give our people more time to check that background so that they know what they are letting into the country.

What do you think should be said to Susan Rice and others that deny what other Leaders are saying as well as our own intel? What about Hillary? Do you think Rice's Mistakes reflect on Hillary or Obama, moreso?

Don't get me wrong I don't think all Foreign Policy is bad.....yet when it comes to the Middle East. I tend to fall in line with Petraeus' thinking. That we really never remained proactive and didn't have a clue as to how to go about dealing with the ME.

Btw now that Hunstmen is out of the Running.....do you think he will be picked by either Administration to go back to work with the Chinese. He is a strength for us there you know!

Sarcogito · Sep 18, 2012

washunut said:
How about using common sense on 9/11? Never heard this guy called a genius by another just a amiable off.

I won't be commenting on that. Sorry.

Sarcogito · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
Yet all you describe could be done in area that would regionalize those Embassies. Private Enterprize could be within the domain. Moreover those in other countries would also have to provide expense and set their areas up as to their Culture. Also some countries may not want be but ameneities could be provided. Means Host nations would have their people actually working together to build something for all.....together. See the that which they have accomplished.

On the Issue of providing services. Perhaps those NFP's that are in those countires could be doing some of that work. Myself I wouldnt have an answer for that on the issueing of Visas other than it may take more time. Which then would give our people more time to check that background so that they know what they are letting into the country.

I'm not saying it couldn't be made to work. I just don't see the nations of the world agreeing on it. But good luck spreading the word.

What do you think should be said to Susan Rice and others that deny what other Leaders are saying as well as our own intel? What about Hillary? Do you think Rice's Mistakes reflect on Hillary or Obama, moreso?

Don't get me wrong I don't think all Foreign Policy is bad.....yet when it comes to the Middle East. I tend to fall in line with Petraeus' thinking. That we really never remained proactive and didn't have a clue as to how to go about dealing with the ME.

No comment.

Btw now that Hunstmen is out of the Running.....do you think he will be picked by either Administration to go back to work with the Chinese. He is a strength for us there you know!

Don't know. He was a good Ambassador. I doubt he would go back under Obama, but perhaps under Romney.

washunut · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
Yet all you describe could be done in area that would regionalize those Embassies. Private Enterprize could be within the domain. Moreover those in other countries would also have to provide expense and set their areas up as to their Culture. Also some countries may not want be but ameneities could be provided. Means Host nations would have their people actually working together to build something for all.....together. See the that which they have accomplished.

On the Issue of providing services. Perhaps those NFP's that are in those countires could be doing some of that work. Myself I wouldnt have an answer for that on the issueing of Visas other than it may take more time. Which then would give our people more time to check that background so that they know what they are letting into the country.

What do you think should be said to Susan Rice and others that deny what other Leaders are saying as well as our own intel? What about Hillary? Do you think Rice's Mistakes reflect on Hillary or Obama, moreso?

Don't get me wrong I don't think all Foreign Policy is bad.....yet when it comes to the Middle East. I tend to fall in line with Petraeus' thinking. That we really never remained proactive and didn't have a clue as to how to go about dealing with the ME.

Btw now that Hunstmen is out of the Running.....do you think he will be picked by either Administration to go back to work with the Chinese. He is a strength for us there you know!

Obama will probably give him a job, he has done good work for him during the campaign. Not sure what you call strength, him working with the Chinese to steal IP and jobs?

MMC · Sep 18, 2012

washunut said:
Obama will probably give him a job, he has done good work for him during the campaign. Not sure what you call strength, him working with the Chinese to steal IP and jobs?

I think speaking four different Chinese Dialects and understanding the differences within the Chinese Peoples.....constitutes a Strength when it comes to negotiations with these people. Don't you?

Moreover i doubt he will work for Obama if he quit on him!

washunut · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
I think speaking four different Chinese Dialects and understanding the differences within the Chinese Peoples.....constitutes a Strength when it comes to negotiations with these people. Don't you?

Moreover i doubt he will work for Obama if he quit on him!

No I do not think that is a big deal. Most Americans feel that China continued to steal our IP and jobs during his watch. They probably laughed at another feckless wannabe.

He quit to run in the Republican primary. Was shocked that the voters were so unworthy they rejected his BS.

Look the guy is a billionaire or whatever, let him stick to his daddy's company.

Navy Pride · Sep 18, 2012

There is no question the Middle East is out of control and Obama has made it ten times worse..........The man is clueless on what to do.............

MMC · Sep 18, 2012

washunut said:
No I do not think that is a big deal. Most Americans feel that China continued to steal our IP and jobs during his watch. They probably laughed at another feckless wannabe.

He quit to run in the Republican primary. Was shocked that the voters were so unworthy they rejected his BS.

Look the guy is a billionaire or whatever, let him stick to his daddy's company.

Well good thing you are not the one that decides by the criteria. As Party lines wouldnt be appropriate with the call. But despite that or not.....sure beats putting someone who dont knw how to speak but one language and knows nothing about any differences. Seems thats what got us into some of those difficulties. Althought both sides of the aisle acknoledge his skill in diplomacy with the Chinese.

As for running for Elected Office. I heard he was a govenor too. Regardless of even that. Some just are not Cut out to be more than a Cabinet member or Head of some Other dept.

washunut · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
Well good thing you are not the one that decides by the criteria. As Party lines wouldnt be appropriate with the call. But despite that or not.....sure beats putting someone who dont knw how to speak but one language and knows nothing about any differences. Seems thats what got us into some of those difficulties. Althought both sides of the aisle acknoledge his skill in diplomacy with the Chinese.

As for running for Elected Office. I heard he was a govenor too. Regardless of even that. Some just are not Cut out to be more than a Cabinet member or Head of some Other dept.

How stupid is it to say someone is qualified to be an ambassador based on knowing a bunch of dialects of Chinese. If that were the case go to downtown NY and find a dozen.

Not sure if you are joking or are a joke.

Misterveritis · Sep 18, 2012

MMC said:
You need to study up with what is going on in Iraq with their Oil Fields. Did you forget Maliki is Shia? Yes the Government's Chump Change cannot even be compared to the Wealth of the American People. Who makes more money? The American People or the US Government?

When one stops feeding the trolls they will go away.

Misterveritis · Sep 18, 2012

washunut said:
Obama will probably give him a job, he has done good work for him during the campaign. Not sure what you call strength, him working with the Chinese to steal IP and jobs?

The one term Marxist will be looking for work himself.

MMC · Sep 19, 2012

Misterveritis said:
When one stops feeding the trolls they will go away.

Yeah I know.....But I still like planting thoughts regardless if it catches in this very moment in time.

Misterveritis · Sep 19, 2012

MMC said:
Yeah I know.....But I still like planting thoughts regardless if it catches in this very moment in time.

In truth I frequently do the same.

DVSentinel · Sep 19, 2012

Misterveritis said:
In truth I frequently do the same.

I'm guilty of doing it also.

Independence and Freedom for the Republic NOW! Texas forever!!!

Binky · Sep 22, 2012

DVSentinel said:
Sounds like you are another one that believes we are moving towards a high potential for internal revolution. Watch it, if you are, the others think we are nutjobs.

You know something? I quit worrying about what others thought of me decades ago. It wastes too much precious time to stew over whether others like or dislike you or what you have to contribute. My time on earth is getting shorter by the minute and I don't give a crapola if people think I'm crazy, ugly, fat, skinny, purple with polka dots or whatever. That being the case, they need to put more time into doing things that are constructive.

Anit-American violence sweeps across 23 world nations

Well-known member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency