What’s worse for America

[Sled21]

(04-17-2022, 03:26 PM)Dill Wrote: Hmmm. So the 10th and final investigation of the Benghazi incident concluded that the State Dept. had failed to protect U.S diplomats in Libya. 

What really "matters" to you here, and to what degree, if you think vetting your sources/information isn't worth the trouble? 

I'd like to address one very important "new finding," which you chose to boldface, from this "very important" report--#6:

What is the point, really, of spinning up a government militia assigned to Annex protection as "Khaddafi loyalists" and (factually incorrect) "the only Libyans that came to the assistance of the United States on the night of the attack"?  

Or to phrase this differently, what segment of the electorate might reliably be expected to accept such "findings" without question,

and what might that segment be reliably expected to infer from them?

The Khaddafi militia was not assigned to annex security. They are the only one's who responded though. The thing to infer here, is the lesson for every foreign leader who has WMD's do not give them up. Qaddafi had them, gave them up, and actually backed America's side in the war on terror. Then the US made the situation in Lybia so bad he was ultimately killed. Ukraine had them, signed a protection agreement, and gave them up. Now they are fighting for their lives.