• 7 hours NATO Hits Up Startups For Tech Evolution
  • 10 hours Italy’s Budget Defiance Sends Bond Yields Soaring
  • 13 hours Iran Turns To Crypto As SWIFT Cuts Off Central Bank
  • 15 hours Chinese Gold Demand On The Rise
  • 1 day IMF Calls On Central Banks To Consider State-Backed Crypto
  • 1 day Why Are Wall Street Banks Fighting Over Gamers?
  • 2 days An Army Of ‘Verified’ Twitter Accounts Is Promoting Bitcoin Scams
  • 2 days New A.I. Virtual Assistant Gives Traders An Edge
  • 2 days How To Play The 5G Revolution
  • 2 days China’s “Singles’ Day” Sees $31 Billion In Sales
  • 3 days Can Big Oil Save Brazil From Its Crushing Debt?
  • 3 days IBM Launchs Global Payments System With New Stablecoin
  • 3 days Trump Lashes Out As Stocks Slip
  • 3 days Dollar Rally Drags Down Commodities
  • 4 days 5 Signs Pointing To A Gold Rally
  • 4 days Low Oil Prices Weigh On Stock Market
  • 4 days Virtual Reality Real Estate Could Become A Billion Dollar Business
  • 5 days Why Is Wall Street Giving Dating Apps The Cold Shoulder?
  • 6 days Mexico Moves To Legalize Recreational Marijuana
  • 7 days New Attorney General Tied To “American Dream” Scam
EU Weighs New Payment System With Iran To Skirt U.S. Sanctions

EU Weighs New Payment System With Iran To Skirt U.S. Sanctions

Demonstrating its eagerness to continue…

Saudi Stocks Plummet As Foreign Investors Bail

Saudi Stocks Plummet As Foreign Investors Bail

The death of journalist Jamal…

Ron Paul

Ron Paul

Congressman Ron Paul of Texas enjoys a national reputation as the premier advocate for liberty in politics today. Dr. Paul is the leading spokesman in…

Contact Author

  1. Home
  2. Markets
  3. Other

What No One Wants to Hear About Benghazi

Congressional hearings, White House damage control, endless op-eds, accusations, and defensive denials. Controversy over the events in Benghazi last September took center stage in Washington and elsewhere last week. However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

Republicans smell a political opportunity over evidence that the Administration heavily edited initial intelligence community talking points about the attack to remove or soften anything that might reflect badly on the president or the State Department.

Are we are supposed to be shocked by such behavior? Are we supposed to forget that this kind of whitewashing of facts is standard operating procedure when it comes to the US government?

Democrats in Congress have offered the even less convincing explanation for Benghazi, that somehow the attack occurred due to Republican sponsored cuts in the security budget at facilities overseas. With a one trillion dollar military budget, it is hard to take this seriously.

It appears that the Administration scrubbed initial intelligence reports of references to extremist Islamist involvement in the attacks, preferring to craft a lie that the demonstrations were a spontaneous response to an anti-Islamic video that developed into a full-out attack on the US outpost.

Who can blame he administration for wanting to shift the focus? The Islamic radicals who attacked Benghazi were the same people let loose by the US-led attack on Libya. They were the rebels on whose behalf the US overthrew the Libyan government. Ambassador Stevens was slain by the same Islamic radicals he personally assisted just over one year earlier.

But the Republicans in Congress also want to shift the blame. They supported the Obama Administration's policy of bombing Libya and overthrowing its government. They also repeated the same manufactured claims that Gaddafi was "killing his own people" and was about to commit mass genocide if he were not stopped. Republicans want to draw attention to the President's editing talking points in hopes no one will notice that if the attack on Libya they supported had not taken place, Ambassador Stevens would be alive today.

Neither side wants to talk about the real lesson of Benghazi: interventionism always carries with it unintended consequences. The US attack on Libya led to the unleashing of Islamist radicals in Libya. These radicals have destroyed the country, murdered thousands, and killed the US ambassador. Some of these then turned their attention to Mali which required another intervention by the US and France.

Previously secure weapons in Libya flooded the region after the US attack, with many of them going to Islamist radicals who make up the majority of those fighting to overthrow the government in Syria. The US government has intervened in the Syrian conflict on behalf of the same rebels it assisted in the Libya conflict, likely helping with the weapons transfers. With word out that these rebels are mostly affiliated with al Qaeda, the US is now intervening to persuade some factions of the Syrian rebels to kill other factions before completing the task of ousting the Syrian government. It is the dizzying cycle of interventionism.

The real lesson of Benghazi will not be learned because neither Republicans nor Democrats want to hear it. But it is our interventionist foreign policy and its unintended consequences that have created these problems, including the attack and murder of Ambassador Stevens. The disputed talking points and White House whitewashing are just a sideshow.

 

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment