Why where we ever in Lybia?
What national interests do we have as a country in Lybia?
Maybe we should ask Senator John McCain that very question.
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/03/29/mccain-says-remove-gaddafi-by-any-means-necessary/
“(CBS News) — Sen. John McCain continued to press President Barack Obama for a more forceful strategy to remove Muammar Qaddafi from power in Libya, saying that the U.S. should be willing to use “any means” necessary to accomplish that goal and comparing the current strategy of limited air power combined with diplomatic pressure to the post-Gulf War strategy in Iraq that kept Saddam Hussein in power.
Mr. Obama laid out his case for intervention Monday night, saying that he authorized the use of missile and airstrikes in an international military action to protect civilians from a “massacre.”
However, while the U.S. policy calls for the departure of Qaddafi from power, the president said the U.S. would not be willing to pursue deeper military involvement, such as sending in ground troops, to make that happen.
Instead, the U.S. would support the continued coalition-led no-fly zone in addition to economic sanctions and other diplomatic tools to increase pressure on Qaddafi.”
Do you think that when Senator John McCain said that “the U.S. should be willing to use “any means” necessary to accomplish that goal”, that might have included arming Lybian rebels to overthrow Qadaffi?
Did armed rebels in fact overthrow and then publically kill Qadaffi and drag him through the streets after sodomizing him in a manner very similar to what they did to Chris Stevens?
Is the US currently trying to arm Syrian rebels to overthrow Assad? Is John McCain for that?
Do you think Chris Stevens might have been there on a matter related to arming those rebels?
Do you think Chris Stevens and the three heroes who died defending him might have been killed with those same us provided weapons?
When you get around to answering those questions, you can stop there. I don’t really need you to admit that your hyperbolic and meaningless assertion that McCain was also responsible for the Shooting of Trayvon Martin has no merit, because it’s quite clear to anyone with a brain that it is a hyperbolic and meaningless assertion that has no merit.
Anyhow, see ya later.
Man, what are you smoking?
Sure, his ideas about it were pretty dumb, likewise a lot of others, but that doesn't change the fact: HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HAPPENED IN BENGHAZI!
Nothing you mentioned comes close to showing he did anything with the three main reasons those people died. Nothing. He also had nothing to do with Trayvon Martin's death, but I'm sure some moonbat could make that same case like what you're trying to do.