Martin O’Malley hits Hillary Clinton with Benghazi attack, faults ‘Twitter’ diplomacy

[NCTraveler]

Democratic presidential underdog Martin O'Malley took a swipe Friday at front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton for mishandling the Arab Spring revolution in Libya and the subsequent deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

“We must recognize that there are real lessons to be learned from the tragedy in Benghazi: Namely, we need to know in advance who is likely to take power — or vie for it — once a dictator is toppled,” the former Maryland governor said in a speech outlining his foreign policy agenda at the Truman National Security Project in Washington.

“Twitter and Facebook are no substitute for personal relationships and human intelligence,” he said in a veiled zinger at Mrs. Clinton, who has prided herself on utilizing social media.

Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state in 2011 when she strongly backed U.S. military support of the rebellion that toppled Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi. The country later devolved into a Islamic militant hotbed, leading to the 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, as well as helping fuel the rise of the terrorist army that calls itself Islamic State.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/26/omalley-hits-clinton-benghazi-attack/#ixzz3eZP2D8In

Really looks like a shady headline. The headline doesn't really match O'Malleys words. What he says is actually pretty spot on. He took a little shot but I think it is acceptable. I seem to find it funny how the Washington Times came to their headline considering what was actually in the article. Either way, I like how O'Malley is drawing differences and giving such weight to topics of enormous importance. He is clearly very knowledgeable on a vast array of topics. I also love how he addressed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens by name. That means a lot to me. That seems to have gotten lost in the politics of Benghazi.

Article is dated June 26, 2015.

[DURHAM D]

1. What did you expect from the Moonie Times? nt

[NCTraveler]

2. I think the quotes are really good to read.

If one reads past the headline, you do get a sense of O'Malley. It is a good read.

[elleng]

8. a much better sense of O'Malley here

http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/meet-martin-o-malley-hillary-clinton-s-latest-unlikely-national-security-critic-20150629

and here

http://www.c-span.org/video/?326811-1/former-governor-martin-omalley-us-national-security

and here

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/omalley-boots-on-the-ground-vs-isis-could-be-counterproductive/

among others.

[NCTraveler]

11. You can find good articles on him everywhere. Including on this topic.

This one still had some great information on O'Malley. The quotes used are excellent and address a bigger issue. It also shows how the media treats our candidates. That in itself is important even though most are aware.

[elleng]

3. It IS a shady article. PLEASE note this:

Doug Wilson, formerly an assistant Defense secretary for public affairs and now O'Malley's senior foreign policy adviser—and also chair of Truman's board of advisers—insisted that the candidate's speech was not intended to indict Clinton or any other candidate, but rather to lend some insight into his national security strategy amid questions of how a former governor with little experience on the issue can serve as commander in chief at a time of global turmoil.

"There is no mention of Hillary or the Republicans," Wilson told Defense One. "People knee-jerk frame Benghazi with Hillary. And what he is saying is you've got to stop doing that. Benghazi is not Hillary 2016, Benghazi is an example of what happens when you topple dictators and do not know or understand who comes after them.

"Martin is not poll-driven," he said. "If he was, he wouldn't be in the race. He's doing this because he thinks there needs to be some different discussions going on in terms of America's role in the world. … He's not a Brookings Institute foreign policy wonk, but he's travelled, he's met foreign leaders … he's essentially putting his interest where his mouth is."

http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/meet-martin-o-malley-hillary-clinton-s-latest-unlikely-national-security-critic-20150629

[NCTraveler]

4. I edited to make it say shady headline.

I actually think the article in insightful. Please read some of O'Malleys quotes. There is nothing wrong with them. Overall, there is nothing wrong with the article. Other than the headline that doesn't match the content.

[elleng]

7. He did NOT throw stones.

[HooptieWagon]

6. BTW, the headline is from the Washington Times, not the OP.

And though I'm no Clinton supporter, the whole Benghazi brouhaha is bullshit. I don't see how that could be prevented, or that response was faulty.
By far the bigger question, that's not being discussed, is the Obama Administrations decision, strongly backed by Secretary Clinton, to involve ourselves in Libya without a comprehensive understanding of the consequences...who would be in power, and how securely, once Quadaffi was ousted. Seems to be a flaw in all our foreign military adventures, that continuously blows up in our faces.

[NCTraveler]

10. Thank you.

"By far the bigger question, that's not being discussed, is the Obama Administrations decision, strongly backed by Secretary Clinton, to involve ourselves in Libya without a comprehensive understanding of the consequences...who would be in power, and how securely, once Quadaffi was ousted. Seems to be a flaw in all our foreign military adventures, that continuously blows up in our faces."


O'Malley touches directly on that and is quoted in the article doing just that. That is why I posted it. I really thought his quotes were very important. I should have taken time to find the transcript and gone from there. I still think it is well worth the read.

[still_one]

9. I don't trust a thing that comes from the washington times

[NCTraveler]

12. Nor should you.

It is a great example of a headline that doesn't match the rhetoric. While the headline stinks, the article has some excellent quotes. I'm not asking you to trust them. Actually, I believe I called it "shady."

[still_one]

13. I understand