May 16, 2013

Possible motive for WH stand down order of Benghazi rescuers. Still an act of treason regardless.

http://www.rightwingnews.com/column-2/why-obama-didnt-send-in-the-troops/

".... To grasp Obama’s state of mind at the time, we have to realize that he had to win the vote of every last supporter in order to prevail. His campaign was not about swing voters, but about a 100 percent turnout of his base. Every last African-American, Latino, single mother and gay voter had to come out and vote or he would not win.
Another key part of his base was the anti-war voters. It was, after all, his opposition to the Iraq War that propelled him into contention against Hillary Clinton in 2007-2008. From the start of his Libyan intervention, he must have worried that he would alienate his supporters by starting another war.
In a profile of President Obama by Vanity Fair’s Michael Lewis suggested that he was obsessed with avoiding any casualties as he sought to lead the war “from behind.” Lewis noted that casualties in Libya might create a narrative about how “a president elected to extract us from a war in one Arab country got Americans killed in another.”
So Obama must have felt he had to lean over backwards not to put more boots on the ground lest they lead to the dreaded casualties. At the time of his meeting with Panetta, Obama did not know that the ambassador was dead and the others who would fall that day had not yet been hit.
So the bottom line is this: President Obama was so anxious to preserve his reputation as a peace candidate that he resisted calls for intervention which might have saved –and, to be fair, could have cost additional — American lives. He certainly put politics first....."

Comment:
Regardless of the motivation, the very act itself is materially treason because it aids and abets the enemy.  No wonder there is a bonanza of distractions from the hearings that cover this heinous crime.

No comments:

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Blog Archive