On Monday, Investors.com posted an article about Hillary Clinton‘s testimony before Congress last week. The sound bite of the week seems to be Ms. Clinton’s rather heated statement, “We had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”
Notice that she does not mention a planned attack in her list. The problem is not actually the motive behind the attack–the problem is that the Obama Administration lied about the motive even after it became obvious that they were lying.
The article concludes:
In a larger context, the Benghazi attack showed that you cannot unilaterally end the “war on terror” or the terrorists’ war on us, by declaring victory.
For years, the Bush administration’s phrase “war on terror” was avoided like the plague by the Obama administration, even if that required the Fort Hood massacre to be classified as “workplace violence.”
But, no matter how clever the rhetoric, reality nevertheless rears its ugly head.
Once the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi is seen for what it was — a highly coordinated and highly successful operation by terrorists who were said to have been vanquished — that calls into question the Obama administration’s Middle East foreign policy.
That is why it still matters.
The war on terror will continue whether or not we choose to fight it. Those who wish to do America harm will continue to train and arm themselves for the fight whether we are fighting or not.