Bean Bag Diplomacy
Bean Bag Diplomacy
Another foreign policy disaster. Another attempt at cover up. It’s just more of the lessons being learned from the September 11 Benghazi assassination of four Americans.
The foreign policy of the Obama administration is as delusional as their views on self-defense.
Generally, liberals are more afraid of possessing the means of self-defense than they are of being attacked by thugs. We not only see this in their foreign policy, but in the way they choose to govern here at home, as well.
Consider that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet — the southern border “has never been more secure than in recent years” — Napolitano imposed the rules of engagement that contributed significantly to the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on December 15, 2010.
Namely, Napolitano’s “wisdom” required our warriors on the front line of our southern border war to fire a bean bag round before firing a real bullet. Evidently a real bullet might destabilize the “never been more secure” Mexican border.
On Brian Terry’s last night on this earth, his team encountered an armed cartel rip crew out to steal the cargo of rival smugglers. Terry’s first shot was his bean bag round. The next shot was from a smuggler, and Terry ended up dead.
So much for Napolitano’s kinder, gentler border enforcement rules of engagement.
The same kinder, gentler rules of engagement pertained in Libya in the run up to the murder of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security, Charlene R. Lamb, told the House Oversight Committee on October 9 that she had rejected requests for more security for the embassy and consulate. “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11.”
In other words, even though embassy officials wanted more security, the liberal “show the enemy we mean no harm by disarming ourselves” mentality prevailed! But as always, this mindset of appeasement has resulted in dead victims.
Another take on the “self-defense is useless” narrative came from the lips of Eric Nordstrom, the State Department’s former regional security officer in Libya, during the Oversight hearing. “When I requested assets, I was criticized….It was a hope that everything would get better.”
Lt. Col. Andrew Wood had headed a 16-member U.S. military team assigned to protect the embassy in Tripoli, Libya’s capital. Wood’s team left Libya in August and was not replaced — in spite of repeated requests for more protection from Ambassador Chris Stevens.
In an effort to keep a “low profile,” the State Department had hired a British firm employing security guards and a “no bullets” rules of engagement to guard the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Of course, this is a beautiful picture of the appeasement mindset in action. It’s like the State Department was trying to communicate to potential terrorists on the 9-11 anniversary that “we mean you no harm because, look, many of our security guards are not even armed!” No wonder Ambassador Stevens was so fearful.
Evidently his concerns were well-grounded because he was one of the four Americans murdered on September 11. “In the six months leading up to the September 11 assault, there were 13 documented threats or attacks on U.S. interests in Tripoli and Benghazi,” according to Bridget Johnson writing in PJ Media on October 11 of this year.
These decisions ultimately were the responsibility of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a vocal advocate of gun control in the United States.
Although not always articulated in debate, a key assumption of anti-self-defense advocates is that bulking up on the means of self-defense can only destabilize. Secretary Clinton acted out that anti-self-defense belief in Libya and denied repeated requests for more guards by Stevens.
Whether bean bags or understaffed protection details, United States policy has emboldened murderous thugs whether they be invading across the Mexican border or assaulting the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Since the requested enhanced military protection had been denied, asking us to believe that more U.S. military personnel for protection of our embassy and consulate would have been provocative does not pass the laugh test.