5 Debate Questions for Obama on Libya

A US honor guard accompanies the remains of the four Americans slain in Benghazi on 9/11/2012.<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/usairforce/8009480292/sizes/m/in/photostream/" target="_blank">Flickr/US Air Force</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


In the weeks since an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killed four Americans, including US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, the explanation for what happened has shifted. Initially, the Obama administration said the incident was a spontaneous protest reacting to an anti-Muslim video to referring to the incident as preplanned. On October 2, however, the Daily Beast‘s Eli Lake reported on a letter from Republicans on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that claimed the US consulate had been bombed twice prior to the September 11 attack, and that US officials had requested more security but had been denied. Here are a few questions debate moderators should consider asking the president as he faces off with Republican candidate Mitt Romney in the first 2012 presidential debate in Denver on Wednesday. 

1. Did US officials in Benghazi request increased security prior to the September 11 attack on the consulate, as Reps. Darrell Issa (R-Calif) and Mike Chaffetz (R-Utah) allege in their letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? If so, was it refused and why?

2. Why did your administration initially believe the attack had been spontaneous rather than pre-planned?

3. Your administration has applied the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force to justify strikes against groups affiliated with Al Qaeda that did not exist on 9/11. Does the AUMF and its “reaffirmation” in the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act apply to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or any of the militant groups operating in Libya? If so, does this mean we are again at war in Libya?

4. If the United States discovers who was involved in the attack, will the US military act unilaterally to kill or capture them? If so, does your administration fear that unilateral US action will sap the goodwill towards the United States and antipathy towards the militias expressed by Libyan citizens since the attack?

5. If the perpetrators of the Benghazi attack are captured during your presidency, either by Libyan or US forces, will they be tried in federal court in the United States?

I wouldn’t be surprised if Libya comes up during the debates. But given the serious issues involved, the moderators should ask substantive questions rather than relying on unverifiable nonsense about “projecting weakness.”

Update: Yes, I understand that the first debate is meant to be focused on domestic policy. However, the moderator, PBS Newshour’s Jim Lehrer, stated in September that the topics were “Subject to possible changes because of news developments.”

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate