DON'T ATTACK SUSAN RICE.

She is doing a good job at the U.N.

Trying to separate the Benghazi attack from the movie that irritated the Muslim world did not make sense.

They were all bunched up in the knowledge that, though, Osama bin Laden has been killed, there were still Islamic Jihadist extremists wanting to harm the United States.

In other words, al Qaeda has suffered a terrible blow, but its ideology still lived; and that vigilance was the only alternative for the U.S. to stay safe.

The nit picking by some Senators and Congressmen was just to politicize the incident in an election year, to harass President Barack Obama, and even cause him to lose his reelection; but, that had failed to achieve its objective.

Of course, the attack was made by terrorists, and that was identified from the very onset, as Gen. Petraeus made in his deposition to Congress yesterday.

He had also given the impression that the barrage of information on that day was huge and complicated, especially when there were demonstrations about the anti-Mohammad film or movie going on in Cairo, Egypt, and around the world.

In view of that, so many materials have to be classified and/or declassified for security reasons.

Also that any public announcement should have no specificity in order not to alert some of those al Qaeda factions, like the Ansar al-Sharia, that the U.S. intelligence was on their trail.

Hence, Ms. Susan Rice was compelled to use the information given her that the demonstrations, that were assumed to be "spontaneous", were part of the Benghazi attack, or the other way around.

Furthermore, due to the fact that the element of people participating in both incidents were the same, Muslims, there was no other explanation than to say that their actions have emanated from the same basic reason.

Did she deviate from her script? No. Therefore, the pillorying of her by some Republican leaders was unjustifiable; and President Barack Obama was right in going to her defense at his news conference the other day, that she (Rice) gave the information she had at the time and nothing else.

What was hurtful about the Benghazi attack was that four bright Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, had lost their lives needlessly, and the nation intensely grieved for their families.

President Obama extended the nation's condolences to those families, while paying tribute to their (diplomats') memory in his address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 25th, 2012; and that showed how much the deaths of those diplomats have hit home to America. He honored them graciously on behalf of all Americans.

The next important thing was for the relevant investigations to lead to the attackers, as the president has vowed that he would pursue them to the end.

What those investigations he has ordered would do would bring them to justice in due course.

That was what a great majority of Americans were waiting to see, rather than some politicians indulging in a blame game, and attempting to tear down the career of a young woman, who was doing a splendid job for her country at the U.N.; Ms. Susan Rice.

Above all, she was qualified to be U.S. Secretary of State, if the Obama administration would offer that position to her, in the absence of the present holder, Mrs. Hillary Clinton.

Comments 7 comments

Ericdierker profile image

Ericdierker 3 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

I find it interesting that you totally left out the fact that Petreaus was testifying as ex- CIA director.


owurakwasip 3 years ago Author

Hi Ericdierker,

All that Gen. David Petraeus had to do was to testify truthfully; and he did.

Whether he still held his office or not, was out of the question.

He told the two U.S. Intelligence Committees what they wanted to know, and he did so in a straight forward manner; that in the spy business there was something as "classification", and that it was never overlooked.

P.S. You spelled his last name wrongly; and whether you did so purposely or not, it did not make any difference; and more so, it did not take anything away from him.

All there was to it was that he was a soldier, (and still a soldier), and that he has served his country extremely well in the past.

For that, there were those of us, who were still proud of him; and he would always be Gen. David Petraeus.


Ericdierker profile image

Ericdierker 3 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

You totally missed my point. Why is the director of the CIA testifying about 5 dead Americans in Libya? Gen. David Petraeus is a great American. His affair is meaningless. Why did he fall on his petard for Obama as Hilary did? Marines should be handling all staffing needs for security, why is a politician and a chief spy, taking responsibility? I absolutely mean no disrespect to Petraeus or Clinton, I respect them both.


owurakwasip 3 years ago Author

Hi Ericdierker,

"Fall on his own petard" would mean that Gen. David Petraeus has been a "fall guy" for the U.S. president Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, which could not be true, because the two that you mentioned were involved the final decisions of the state.

With the Benghazi attack, nothing that needed a last minute approval was on Obama's desk, or there was no evidence of that as yet.

Neither has there been any critique of Hillary Clinton of negligence of duty, with respect to the affairs of her department.

The General was in charge of the CIA, and the issue fell squarely on the Intelligence Service.

Benghazi was only a diplomatic facility and not even an embassy, and if the security there was problematic, it was the responsibility of the Ambassador to find a way around it.

Unfortunately, the Ambassador, Chris Stevens, was killed in that attack, and therefore the true cause of what happened in Benghazi would never be known.

In other words, any conclusions by the U.S. Congress or any other investigative body about the Benghazi attack would come out of pure guess work based on reports common or analogous to the many complaints of the over 200 embassies, consulates and diplomatic facilities that the U.S. has around the world.

Such matters were internal issues and they seldom reached the desk of the Secretary of State, let alone the president in the Oval Office, or even the White House Chief of Staff.

They only got any kind of attention at the lower levels of the secretaries in the White House and at the State Department.

The only rational regret that has emerged from the whole episode was that Gen. Petraeus was a soldier (and he is still a soldier), and he should not have been forced to become a spy.

With him being a fall guy for anyone was in your own imagination, for you to have used the word "petard" in your comment.


Ericdierker profile image

Ericdierker 3 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

Stay focused. The US citizens killed were spies for the US in Libya. We were running a spy operation there and the men involved were caught and therefor murdered in a horrible fashion as an example.

I am sorry for the loss of good souls. But I am disgusted with our failure to product our assets.

The buck reaches POTUS's desk.


owurakwasip 3 years ago Author

Hi Ericdierker,

Of course, the news of the four Americans losing their lives was horrifying, but it was relayed to the White House after the misfortune had occurred.

You might then ask about the activities in "the situation room" and the "real time" of the attack being monitored at the State Department?

Well, you might also have heard President Barack Obama saying that orders have already been given for the Intelligence and the Security service personnel "to go to work".

Therefore those in the field became wholly responsible for the actions that were unfolding at the time.

No further instructions could go out, since the "field men" should now have control of the situation; and how they conducted or maneuvered that situation was solely in their hands.

There was a botched up operation at the airport with no transportation for the unit that was supposed to go in and help.

Now, could you or anyone else lay that at the door of the White House? Certainly not.

Soldiers at war have to have everything running smoothly. Their commander would only be comfortable with a good or better performance by them.

He would not be there doing their work; and anything else that would happen, right or wrong, would be contained in his report, after the fact.

The Benghazi attack should not be repeated anywhere else again, as it only gave the U.S. Intelligence a bad name. That was where the buck should stop.


Ericdierker profile image

Ericdierker 3 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

There is a wonderful scene in an old book, where the commanding centurion asks a teacher for a miracle. He explains to the teacher that he need not come to the centurions home to do the miracle. Like the centurion all the teacher need do is command it and it will be done.

(that is only a metaphor but it gets my opinion across)

I take responsibility for everyone under my command.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working