How is that on her? Is the Secret Service and DEA's use of prostitutes on the President? These folks aren't omniscient. The Sec of State is the #1 diplomat. She did much to repair the US' s image smongst our allies. Ambiguous? Probably, but our image was pretty tarnished among friend and foe alike. She carried out the foreign policy of the administration. Now, if you want to criticize the policy, I've got no issues with that.
Yes. The CIA isn't going to talk. Period. As I said, I have no issues on criticizing the policy laid out for her. I'm a bit of a homer, but I really feel she took the bullet as you said. The Benghazi stuff is political theater 101 and the first shots fired for 2016. The CIA controlled the assets and was calling the shots. That's not on Hillary.
How on earth, at this point, can anyone NOT be an independent voter? I have no idea how an individual can exclusively support one party or another. Neither side can effectively throw blame about any issue anymore ... there is too much cannon fodder on both sides. I'm ready for someone outside the establishment ... please!! P.S. - I totally get Democrats backing Hillary on the Benghazi debacle especially after T-Tradition's post. However, I'm really baffled at the support for Holder. I don't care which side of the aisle you are on, that guy is as f'ed up as a chicken wire canoe. He needs to go.
I don't want to get into a huge argument about it, but to me she comes off as one of the least genuine people on the planet.
No argument to be had. I respect your right to your views. I was just trying to give a little insight from a guy that knows her minus any political/partisan input that we get in the media.
I'm not locked into voting straight party. Only simpletons and lazy voters do that, imo. I have crossed over many times in elections if I think the cadidate's views are in line with mine. If neither is, I will do a write-in. Most of my crossover vites are in local/state elections, but I have voted Republican in some national elections. It's just thst 90% of the time, the Republican candidate's views are in direct opposition to my own.
Within three years Obama will declare himself " King of the Muslim brotherhood States of America".... its coming.
Eyes on thighs folks....eyes on thighs. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/were-targeting-terrorists-syria-kremlin-093858253.html http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/01/us-mideast-crisis-syria-iranians-idUSKCN0RV4DN20151001
What they refer to as "insurgents" are what the U.S. refers to as anti-Assad rebels whom we've long backed in hopes of his eventual overthrow. This doesn't have a damn thing to do with ISIS. Putin knows it. President Obama knows it. Worst of all, Putin doesn't give a shit that President Obama knows it - because he knows that he'll do exactly jack-shit about it. When you've allowed the Russians to operate unimpeded for 7 years, it shouldn't be surprising when they start pushing harder, and into new places.
It appears that we have to pick between freedom and stability in the ME. We can't get both and we have to be willing to live with the outcome of whatever path is chosen.
Bingo, they are full aware of who they're targeting. Russia has taken it to the next level with full knowledge that the US will continue its diplomatic approach. Russia has a special interest in keeping Assad in power and will do what it needs to in order to keep him there. I'm interested to see what Iran will bring to the table.
Freedom in the ME is about as likely as Butch Jones turning in his resignation today and Gruden being announced in time for primetime news tonight. With so many interests, money, and resources involved stability is the best thing this world could hope for.
Pretty good map on the current status of the region. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...syria-control-map-isis-rebels-airstrikes.html