Why was there no US Military Security at Benghazi and Cairo?
The Obama/Clinton mid East policy is playing out exactly as expected – at least as expected by anyone outside the administration and the media.
Obama’s policy, which is equal parts denial of the existence of radical Islam, ignorance of obvious, operational incompetence and faculty lounge idealism, led to riots in the street during the “Arab Spring”. It has emboldened every Islamist faction in the region to flex its muscle, safe in the knowledge that whatever side they were on, Obama was with them. The US, under Obama, would not lift a finger to “interfere” – and Obama has no intention of helping Israel.
Even the invasion of sovereign US facilities, and the murder of 4 US government officials including an Ambassador, elicits no more than a stern dressing down by Hillary Clinton and an apology to the terrorists from Obama.
What we do know is that the anti-American revulsion, which started on September 11 in Egypt and has since taken Libya and Yemen by storm, is spreading like wildfire. The NYT writes: ‘Protests were also reported at American missions in Morocco, Sudan and Tunisia, where the police also fired tear gas to disperse crowds.” It is only going to get far worse, as suddenly geopolitics, and the US response thereto, becomes the biggest issue in the presidential debate.
If the Obama’s “handling” of the economy isn’t enough by itself to cost him the election, his “handling” of the event in Libya and the rest of the middle East should seal the deal. It will be interesting to see if the media finally recognizes Obama for the amateur that he is.