Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

napkinz

(17,199 posts)
Tue May 6, 2014, 02:49 PM May 2014

RONALD REAGAN’S BENGHAZI

May 6, 2014
by Jane Mayer

Late Saturday night, at the Vanity Fair party celebrating the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, Darrell Issa, the Republican congressman from San Diego, California, was chatting amiably with Governor Chris Christie, of New Jersey, leaning in to swap gossip and looking very much at ease in his tuxedo. Issa, who has been the lead inquisitor into what, in shorthand, has come to be known as “Benghazi,” was having a busy weekend. House Speaker John Boehner had just announced a plan for a new special select investigative committee, and, on Friday, Issa had announced that he had issued a subpoena to Secretary of State John Kerry for a new round of hearings devoted to searching, against diminishing odds, for some dirty, dark secret about what really happened in Benghazi.

Ever since militant jihadists killed four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador, in an attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in that remote Libyan town two years ago, House Republicans have kept up a drumbeat of insinuation. They have already devoted thirteen hearings, twenty-five thousand pages of documents, and fifty briefings to the topic, which have turned up nothing unexpected. Kerry’s predecessor, Hillary Clinton, has already accepted responsibility for the tragedy, and the State Department has issued a critical independent report on diplomatic security, resulting in the dismissal of four employees. If the hearings accomplish nothing else, it seems that they promise to keep the subject on life support at least through the midterm congressional elections, and possibly on through any potential Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign. The word “impeachment” has even been trotted out by Obama opponents in connection with this non-scandal.

Watching Issa silhouetted against the Belle Époque windows of the Italian Ambassador’s residence, which were wide open to a garden bathed in colored spotlights, I found myself thinking about another tragedy, thirty years ago, that played out very differently.

Around dawn on October 23, 1983, I was in Beirut, Lebanon, when a suicide bomber drove a truck laden with the equivalent of twenty-one thousand pounds of TNT into the heart of a U.S. Marine compound, killing two hundred and forty-one servicemen. The U.S. military command, which regarded the Marines’ presence as a non-combative, “peace-keeping mission,” had left a vehicle gate wide open, and ordered the sentries to keep their weapons unloaded. The only real resistance the suicide bomber had encountered was a scrim of concertina wire. When I arrived on the scene a short while later to report on it for the Wall Street Journal, the Marine barracks were flattened. From beneath the dusty, smoking slabs of collapsed concrete, piteous American voices could be heard, begging for help. Thirteen more American servicemen later died from injuries, making it the single deadliest attack on American Marines since the Battle of Iwo Jima.

-snip-

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members. This was true even though then, as now, the opposition party controlled the majority in the House. Tip O’Neill, the Democratic Speaker of the House, was no pushover. He, like today’s opposition leaders in the House, demanded an investigation—but a real one, and only one. Instead of playing it for political points, a House committee undertook a serious investigation into what went wrong at the barracks in Beirut. Two months later, it issued a report finding “very serious errors in judgment” by officers on the ground, as well as responsibility up through the military chain of command, and called for better security measures against terrorism in U.S. government installations throughout the world.

read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/05/ronald-reagans-benghazi.html


























24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RONALD REAGAN’S BENGHAZI (Original Post) napkinz May 2014 OP
K&R liberal N proud May 2014 #1
Worse yet, moondust May 2014 #2
Reagan's role in 9/11 ... napkinz May 2014 #4
k/r Dawson Leery May 2014 #3
A tale of two terrorist attacks napkinz May 2014 #5
3,000 plus Americans were murdered during 9/11 malaise May 2014 #6
Bush was warned and did nothing ... napkinz May 2014 #7
But but but malaise May 2014 #8
two great quotes! napkinz May 2014 #9
Benghazi kardonb May 2014 #10
don't forget Iraq napkinz May 2014 #13
A tale of two terrorist attacks ProSense May 2014 #11
We Don't Claim Issa in San Diego ProgressiveJarhead May 2014 #12
This is how I hear it... humbled_opinion May 2014 #14
"never before has a President and SecState intentionally and for purely political reasons lied ... napkinz May 2014 #16
They argue context... humbled_opinion May 2014 #17
do you have any rational co-workers? napkinz May 2014 #20
No isn't it a shame... humbled_opinion May 2014 #22
Two days later, he invaded big bad Grenada RufusTFirefly May 2014 #15
Pre-emptive RW response: Blue_Tires May 2014 #18
K&R! The replies too! nt XRubicon May 2014 #19
Excellent accurate frame, napkinz.. from Jane Mayer.. And Also Remember gop "Absolutely Defunded.." Cha May 2014 #21
thanks Cha napkinz May 2014 #23
The republican Benghazi is 9/11 IronLionZion May 2014 #24

moondust

(19,993 posts)
2. Worse yet,
Tue May 6, 2014, 03:00 PM
May 2014

Reagan turned and ran like a scared little girl, which emboldened at least a generation of terrorists.

napkinz

(17,199 posts)
5. A tale of two terrorist attacks
Tue May 6, 2014, 04:27 PM
May 2014

05/06/14
By Steve Benen

A terrorist attack on a U.S. outpost in the Middle East. Americans killed. Congressional hearings. Evidence that the administration failed to take security as seriously as it should have.

It was over 30 years ago that a terrorist attack on a U.S. Marine compound in Beirut killed 241 American servicemen, which came just six months after militants had bombed the U.S. embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans. Jane Mayer, who covered the attack in Lebanon at the time, reflects today on the domestic political environment – and how much it’s changed.

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members. This was true even though then, as now, the opposition party controlled the majority in the House. Tip O’Neill, the Democratic Speaker of the House, was no pushover. He, like today’s opposition leaders in the House, demanded an investigation – but a real one, and only one. Instead of playing it for political points, a House committee undertook a serious investigation into what went wrong at the barracks in Beirut. Two months later, it issued a report finding “very serious errors in judgment” by officers on the ground, as well as responsibility up through the military chain of command, and called for better security measures against terrorism in U.S. government installations throughout the world.

In other words, Congress actually undertook a useful investigation and made helpful recommendations. The report’s findings, by the way, were bipartisan. (The Pentagon, too, launched an investigation, issuing a report that was widely accepted by both parties.)


Six months after the terrorist attack, militants struck American officials in Beirut again, killing the CIA’s station chief. This happened during an election year, but I can find no evidence of any federal politician using this in television attack ads. And six months after that, terrorists bombed a U.S. government outpost in Beirut once more – in the middle of Reagan’s re-election campaign. The then-president conceded at the time that repairs at the U.S. embassy annex were behind schedule, telling the public, “Anyone who’s ever had their kitchen done over knows that it never gets done as soon as you wish it would.”

Again, no hearings. No attack ads. No select committee. No subpoenas. No organized conspiracy theories pushed by members of Congress or their media allies. No talk about impeaching the president.

read more: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/tale-two-terrorist-attacks









malaise

(269,054 posts)
6. 3,000 plus Americans were murdered during 9/11
Tue May 6, 2014, 04:51 PM
May 2014

No ReTHUG outrage there either - indeed they kept on telling us that the war criminals kept America safe (after the worst attack on American soil). What's more they ignored warnings of an attack.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
11. A tale of two terrorist attacks
Tue May 6, 2014, 05:46 PM
May 2014
A tale of two terrorist attacks

By Steve Benen

A terrorist attack on a U.S. outpost in the Middle East. Americans killed. Congressional hearings. Evidence that the administration failed to take security as seriously as it should have.

It was over 30 years ago that a terrorist attack on a U.S. Marine compound in Beirut killed 241 American servicemen, which came just six months after militants had bombed the U.S. embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans. Jane Mayer, who covered the attack in Lebanon at the time, reflects today on the domestic political environment – and how much it’s changed.

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members. This was true even though then, as now, the opposition party controlled the majority in the House. Tip O’Neill, the Democratic Speaker of the House, was no pushover. He, like today’s opposition leaders in the House, demanded an investigation – but a real one, and only one. Instead of playing it for political points, a House committee undertook a serious investigation into what went wrong at the barracks in Beirut. Two months later, it issued a report finding “very serious errors in judgment” by officers on the ground, as well as responsibility up through the military chain of command, and called for better security measures against terrorism in U.S. government installations throughout the world.

In other words, Congress actually undertook a useful investigation and made helpful recommendations. The report’s findings, by the way, were bipartisan. (The Pentagon, too, launched an investigation, issuing a report that was widely accepted by both parties.)

Six months after the terrorist attack, militants struck American officials in Beirut again, killing the CIA’s station chief. This happened during an election year, but I can find no evidence of any federal politician using this in television attack ads.

And six months after that, terrorists bombed a U.S. government outpost in Beirut once more – in the middle of Reagan’s re-election campaign. The then-president conceded at the time that repairs at the U.S. embassy annex were behind schedule, telling the public, “Anyone who’s ever had their kitchen done over knows that it never gets done as soon as you wish it would.”

Again, no hearings. No attack ads. No select committee. No subpoenas. No organized conspiracy theories pushed by members of Congress or their media allies. No talk about impeaching the president.

I’m trying to imagine what would happen if, in today’s climate, terrorists struck repeatedly at U.S. installations in a Middle Eastern country, killing hundreds of Americans.

- more -

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/tale-two-terrorist-attacks


humbled_opinion

(4,423 posts)
14. This is how I hear it...
Tue May 6, 2014, 06:03 PM
May 2014

The teabags at my job say there is no comparison to Benghazi no precedent ever...because never before has a President and SecState intentionally and for purely political reasons lied to the American people about the reason behind a terrorist attack that killed Americans by blaming the attacks on some youtube video in order to trick the American public (in and election year) into thinking that radical Islamic terrorism was on the decline. They claim this whole charade is a testimony to the failed foreign policy of this Admin....

I tell them good luck in proving that and they tell me to sit down and shut the PLAME up...

LOL

I love politics.

napkinz

(17,199 posts)
16. "never before has a President and SecState intentionally and for purely political reasons lied ...
Tue May 6, 2014, 07:10 PM
May 2014

to the American people about the reason behind a terrorist attack that killed Americans"


WOW ... who was it that made the bogus link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 a casus belli that resulted in the deaths of 5000 American soldiers and over 100,000 Iraqis?


hmmm ... what administration did that ... the name escapes me


(remind your teabagger co-workers)






humbled_opinion

(4,423 posts)
17. They argue context...
Tue May 6, 2014, 07:29 PM
May 2014

Bush lied to prevent another attack Obama lied after the attack happened... they blame one on bad intel and the other as purely political in the run up to a presidential election...

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
18. Pre-emptive RW response:
Tue May 6, 2014, 07:35 PM
May 2014

"Yeah, but Reagan took responsibility for it from the start, and didn't blame some nonexistent cheesy movie!!!!"

(I've been seeing a lot of this on Twitter feeds)

Cha

(297,319 posts)
21. Excellent accurate frame, napkinz.. from Jane Mayer.. And Also Remember gop "Absolutely Defunded.."
Tue May 6, 2014, 08:09 PM
May 2014
GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/10/985191/chaffetz-absolutely-funding-embassy-security/



mahalo napkinz~

IronLionZion

(45,457 posts)
24. The republican Benghazi is 9/11
Wed May 7, 2014, 09:05 AM
May 2014

and for all their righteous indignation and fouxtrage, they still decided to cut funding for embassy security even more. Not to mention the 13 benghazis that happened at US embassies and consulates during W's term.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»RONALD REAGAN’S BENGHAZI