Steve Breen by Steve Breen

Steve Breen

Comments (9) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. moderateisntleft

    moderateisntleft said, about 2 years ago

    The protests started in Cairo over an internet video. Soon there-after a similar protest began in Libya. It is not un-common for one protest in the mid-east at an American Embassy to lead to another in a neighboring country (remember the events of the Arab Spring?). That plus the fact that the government in Egypt wasn’t doing much to protect the Embassy (it is after all the host country that is required by treaty – that way an Embassy doesn’t have standing troops….). The Interim government in Libya however was on good terms with the US, Amb. Stevens was popular with them. Libya even sent forces in to protect the embassy, unlike Egypt. Are any of youstarting to follow? At the time attention would have been focused on Cairo, not Bengahzi.

  2. mikefive

    mikefive said, about 2 years ago


    Embassies do have standing troops, U. S. Marines. They also guard consulates, but I’m not sure if there is a lower size limit on if the consulate gets Marine guards.

  3. MortyForTyrant

    MortyForTyrant said, about 2 years ago


    Everything you say is correct, but there is also the date (9-11) to consider. I guess the Internet video was a nice smokescreen to be used by the attackers and it confused the defenders. But it shouldn’t have, not on that special date.


    But the point is moot, they couldn’t have done much more, how many guards, weapons etc. can an embassy or a consulate support? With the exception of the new embassy in Iraq, of course.


    But does the U.S. want to turn all their diplomatic outposts into heavily guarded fortresses? What kind of an image would that project around the world? The U.S. as a global occupier? Not good, not good at all…

  4. Ardvarck

    Ardvarck GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    How many of you have visited a US embassy abroad? I think a trip to one of these would be helpful before spouting off your expertise.

  5. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    I’m so glad “W” didn’t screw up and there wasn’t any attack on New York in 2001 as a result of Saudi Arabians being upset over our attacks on Iraq. Oh, right, all those WMDs we were promised existed so we could launch a full scale attack on Iraq as a result of that attack on NY, to get the “perpetrator”. NO cover up or lies in that.

  6. Archimedes

    Archimedes said, about 2 years ago


    Right no need to have a heavily guarded consulate in an area where they consulate has already been attacked in the last month, where the presence of jihadists is a known factor, and where just a short time ago tanks were rolling in the streets.

  7. disgustedtaxpayer

    disgustedtaxpayer said, about 2 years ago

    modisntleft was not correct…there were no protests in Benghazi on 9/11/12.
    this fact has been in the news numerous times.
    People on the ground said no protests happened there.
    Drone videos showed no protests at Benghazi.
    Consulate videos showed no protests……
    Emails said there were no protests….just an assault by up to 150 armed terrorists….in 2 waves….with RPGs and mortars…not protest equipment.
    if and when congress holds open hearings, the truth will surface in spite of the coverup MSM. The Obama/Clinton regime had pleas for more security beginning June 2012.
    Clinton might have been willing but Obama overruled her.
    No extra security people or equipment was sent to Benghazi although Ambass.Stevens and some CIA reported to D.C. that al Qaeda was growing in numbers and threats and that the Ambass. was on a hit list.
    Any other president would have made sure our Americans were protected, but Obama has this “treat Muslims with trust” policy, in spite of the mounting records of murders and attacks around the world….so Obama’s USA was open and unprotected. And 4 Americans were slaughtered.

  8. thegreatack

    thegreatack said, about 2 years ago

    Behghazi was engineered by the Republicans so they’d have a talking point to embarrass Obama. Obama is as clean as a whistle, so they needed to create something – anything! That is why they won’t let it go, they want to get their money’s worth!
    The Reps have no problem sacrificing American lives, when it suits, as long as those lives are not theirs.

  9. MortyForTyrant

    MortyForTyrant said, about 2 years ago


    Please try to remember that you are a GUEST everywhere outside the U.S. and that you CAN’T simply put an armored division in every compound. It is primarily the task of the host-nation to guard your embassies etc. and that failed massively in Benghazi. It is clear that the “Arab Spring” had something to do with that (security not so good, citizens more “free” and upset). But the logical thing would have been to CLOSE the consulate if it was deemed in danger. How many Americans live in Libya? Do they really need a consulate in that city?


    For comparison: I live in Frankfurt, which is a big city in Germany, but not the capital. We have a lot of consulates, but the embassies are all in Berlin. Yet there are consulates where our local police is at the scene 24/7. Sometimes that’s permanent (Iran…), sometimes thats temporary (USA after Benghazi). I don’t know how theses consulates look from the inside, but I very much doubt that any of them has – for example – a bazooka in it. We wouldn’t allow that, and for good reasons. Would you allow the Libyan embassy in Washington to have 100 heavily armed guards? Didn’t think so…

  10. Refresh Comments.