• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House Sought Options to Strike Iran

TU Curmudgeon said:
Your evidence would have been a bit more compelling were it not for the "Last updated October 13, 2011" bit.
Click to expand...

This one was a give-a-way, “This publication is now archived.”

.....but the headline looked good, right?
 
dcsports said:
That was my thought. It would be irresponsible to NOT consider all options to protect our Embassy, and to have assets in place in case the situation worsened. If nothing else, this was the clear lesson of Benghazi.
Click to expand...

You have a very good point.


and


One major cause of those deficiencies was that no one was quite sure who was in charge of the mission’s security. Two State Department bureaus, Diplomatic Security and Near Eastern Affairs, had nominal authority. However, there were no clear lines of responsibility; no person or bureau had point on Benghazi security. So while both bureaus made piecemeal improvements to the mission’s security, they didn’t add up to enough to make a real difference.

Moreover, the mission’s confusing legal status made meeting its security needs particularly hard. The Benghazi mission wasn’t an embassy or even an official consulate; it was so off-book that the Libyan government was never officially notified of its existence. This strange legal status put the mission outside the normal State Department procedures used to allocate security funding and personnel.

Finally, since no one in the US intelligence community had evidence of an imminent attack, neither Ambassador Stevens nor the State Department made Benghazi security a very high priority. Stevens’ trip to Benghazi on the day of attack wasn’t coordinated with the US security team based with the US embassy in Tripoli, so they didn’t go. The ambassador, according to the review board, “did not see a direct threat of an attack of this nature and scale.” So while Stevens did ask for more security, his requests weren’t taken as urgent enough to overcome the bureaucratic muddle standing in their way.
[SOURCE]
​
 
Rexedgar said:
This one was a give-a-way, “This publication is now archived.”

.....but the headline looked good, right?
Click to expand...

That's a risk you run when you go on discussion boards armed only with "a list of canned talking points" - most of which you haven't actually bothered to check for yourself.
 
mrdeltoid said:
Military plans should always be classified as it may effect , or directly conflict with diplomatic efforts.
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about any military plans. We are talking about a White House request for military options months after it happened. And it's an important thing for the public to know as thinking about attacking a country like Iran should never be done in a casual manner. Especially when all that happened was someone making a few holes in a empty parking lot. It would be also be interesting to know if they were planning to notify Congress of it's intentions. I certainly hope they would. Because supposedly only Congress has the power to declare war.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Why would the info that they had asked the Pentagon for those options be a national security secret?
Click to expand...

You didn't just ask that question? You're joking, right?
 
Atomic Kid said:
We aren't talking about any military plans. We are talking about a White House request for military options months after it happened. And it's an important thing for the public to know as thinking about attacking a country like Iran should never be done is a casual matter. Especially when all that happened was someone making a few holes in a empty parking lot. It would be also be interesting to know if they were planning to notify Congress of it's intentions. I certainly hope they would. Because supposedly only Congress has the power to declare war.
Click to expand...

Those are "mitary plans".
 
apdst said:
You didn't just ask that question? You're joking, right?
Click to expand...

If I wanted a joke all would I have to do is ask you that question.
 
I wonder if one of those plans discussed for striking Iran was the one where we betray the Kurds and hand Syria to Iran.
 
apdst said:
So, you were serious when you asked that question? :lamo
Click to expand...

Well then enlighten us, General Patton. What military strategy or plans were revealed? You don't think that Iran doesn't know that the US military has on hand previously drafted plans of action ready for presentation should the situation arise? I'm sure Iran has such previously prepared plans as well. But the American people deserve to be informed that this President was considering taking a course of action that had the potential of launching a major conflict in the Middle East some months back.
 
Last edited:
Atomic Kid said:
Well then enlighten us, General Patton. What military strategy or plans were revealed? You don't think that Iran doesn't know that the US military has on hand previously drafted plans of action ready for presentation should the situation arise? I'm sure Iran has such previously prepared plans as well. But the American people deserves to be informed that this President was considering taking a course of action that had the potential of launching a major conflict in the Middle East some months back.
Click to expand...

From the OP:

As part of the talks, Mr. Trump’s National Security Council, led by John Bolton, asked the Pentagon to provide the White House with military options to strike Iran. The request, which hasn’t been previously reported, generated concern at the Pentagon and State Department, current and former U.S. officials say.
Click to expand...
 
apdst said:
From the OP:
Click to expand...

See? I knew you would be good for a joke. Explain please what grand strategic plans were revealed in that post or story? Come on, tell us!
 
Atomic Kid said:
See? I knew you would be good for a joke. Explain please what grand strategic plans were revealed in that post or story? Come on, tell us!
Click to expand...

The fact that the conversation was leaked. That's what. Classified information is classified information. Some random dude on the internet doesn't get to determine what should be classified and what shouldn't.
 
Saladin4 said:
What About What About Obama....Same tired ass excuse...Still good to see the Pentagon tell trump and his goons to go to hell
Click to expand...

History scares the **** out of you people, because it exposes your lies.
 
apdst said:
The fact that the conversation was leaked. That's what. Classified information is classified information. Some random dude on the internet doesn't get to determine what should be classified and what shouldn't.
Click to expand...

What conversation? I haven't seen any transcript of a conversation. And speaking of random dudes on the internet. When exactly did you decide this was classified information?
 
Atomic Kid said:
What conversation? I haven't seen any transcript of a conversation. And speaking of random dudes on the internet. When exactly did you decide this was classified information?
Click to expand...

You can't lie your way out of this one.
 
apdst said:
You can't lie your way out of this one.
Click to expand...

Apparently you think that you can. So once again there, General. What grand military plans and strategy was revealed? What exactly was classified about this story?
 
Atomic Kid said:
Apparently you think that you can. So once again there, General. What grand military plans and strategy was revealed? What exactly was classified about this story?
Click to expand...

The conversation was classified. It was leaked to the press. Why do you hate your country?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
You have a very good point.


and


One major cause of those deficiencies was that no one was quite sure who was in charge of the mission’s security. Two State Department bureaus, Diplomatic Security and Near Eastern Affairs, had nominal authority. However, there were no clear lines of responsibility; no person or bureau had point on Benghazi security. So while both bureaus made piecemeal improvements to the mission’s security, they didn’t add up to enough to make a real difference.

Moreover, the mission’s confusing legal status made meeting its security needs particularly hard. The Benghazi mission wasn’t an embassy or even an official consulate; it was so off-book that the Libyan government was never officially notified of its existence. This strange legal status put the mission outside the normal State Department procedures used to allocate security funding and personnel.

Finally, since no one in the US intelligence community had evidence of an imminent attack, neither Ambassador Stevens nor the State Department made Benghazi security a very high priority. Stevens’ trip to Benghazi on the day of attack wasn’t coordinated with the US security team based with the US embassy in Tripoli, so they didn’t go. The ambassador, according to the review board, “did not see a direct threat of an attack of this nature and scale.” So while Stevens did ask for more security, his requests weren’t taken as urgent enough to overcome the bureaucratic muddle standing in their way.
[SOURCE]
​
Click to expand...

Deflection from the point at hand. (And a false narrative at that...)

The issue here is the response once the attack began. At Benghazi, the Obama administration utterly failed our diplomats, leaving them on their own for 13 hours. So yes, it makes sense for this administration (and those following) to explore all options and have contingency plans in place when an embassy faces attack.
 
apdst said:
The conversation was classified. It was leaked to the press. Why do you hate your country?
Click to expand...

Says who? You? Aren't you just some random dude on the internet?
 
joko104 said:
[h=1]White House Sought Options to Strike Iran[/h][FONT="][SIZE=3]WASHINGTON—On a warm night in early September, militants fired three mortars into Baghdad’s sprawling diplomatic quarter, home to the U.S. Embassy.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="][SIZE=3]The shells—launched by a group aligned with Iran—landed in an open lot, harming no one. But they triggered unusual alarm in Washington, where President Trump’s national security team conducted a series of meetings to discuss a forceful American response.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]As part of the talks, Mr. Trump’s National Security Council, led by John Bolton, asked the Pentagon to provide the White House with military options to strike Iran. The request, which hasn’t been previously reported, generated concern at the Pentagon and State Department, current and former U.S. officials say.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/white-house-sought-options-to-strike-iran/ar-BBSaBnj?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Whoever released this information should absolutely be prosecuted for releasing military national security secrets. There is no justification whatsoever for anyone in the State Department or ANY other capacity divulging national security secrets. There are NO greater national security secrets than our military contingency plans. In the most real sense, anyone who released this information to the press was acting 100% as a spy for Iran. [/FONT]
Click to expand...
seize the north seas gas fields they own stakes in. Tell them to withdraw their troops in 72 hours or you will take those gas fields away for ever with no financial compensation.
 
apdst said:
Show us where it was declassified for publication.
Click to expand...

No, you're the one who is claiming it was classified. Come on! Show us! What secrets were revealed there. General? Put up or shut up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom