McCain, Obama Battle Over Pakistan

"Sen. John McCain of Arizona, close to clinching the GOP nomination, called Sen. Barack Obama 'naive' today and...blasted him for advocating a bombing of Al Qaeda hide-outs in Pakistan," the Los Angeles Times reports.

"The best idea is not to broadcast what you're going to do, that's naive," said McCain, who also questioned the very notion of "bombing Pakistan without their permission." ...

In a conference call with reporters to respond, Obama foreign policy advisor Susan Rice said that McCain was "misrepresenting and distorting Barack Obama's positions" and argued that the Democrat "never suggested bombing an ally."

"McCain promises more war in Iraq," she said. "Obama will end the war in Iraq and focus on terrorists in Afghanistan."

TNR: McCain Is Lying: Jonathan Chait writes for The New Republic:

Last night John McCain accused Barack Obama of, among other things, having "once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan." This is a lie. ... There is nothing in Obama's speech, or any other Obama speech, about "bombing" Pakistan. Both implicitly and explicitly, he called for small, Special Operations-type incursions. ...

Meanwhile, you know who is coming closer to "bombing an ally"? The Bush administration, whose determined prosecution of the war on terror McCain continues to tout. The Washington Post reported -- as it happens, the same day McCain made his smear -- that the CIA launched Hellfire missiles at an al Qaeda operative in Pakistan. As the Post noted, "Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval."

So, to review: Obama did not call for bombing Pakistan, ever. Meanwhile the Bush administration is undertaking air attacks against targets in Pakistan. Is this wildly irresponsible? I suppose you could make that case. But McCain isn't interested in an argument about the merits of striking al Qaeda against the costs of undermining Pervez Musharraf. He's just interested in lying about what Obama said in order to portray him as a foreign policy novice.

Matthew Yglesias has much more from the Obama campaign call with Susan Rice:

[O]n experience there's a three-pronged attack. First, Obama does have experience, with Rice citing the fact that he authored "crucial legislation to secure the United States from the threat of loose nuclear materials" and serves on committees and subcommittees dealing with foreign relations, veterans affairs, and homeland security. Second, this means that Obama has actually "acquired more traditional washington foreign policy experience" than most presidents including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter (Carter in fact served on a nuclear sub and I'm told this gave him a better understanding of nuclear issues than presidents before or after).

Third, there's more to life than being a prisoner of DC conventional wisdom -- "McCain, like Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney may have years of Washington experience" but they've all made "flawed judgments and as a consequence we're less safe." In a crucial point, Rice observed (emphasis added) that a McCain administration would be "very much a continuation and intensification of the failed Bush policy, remaining in Iraq indefinitely not investing adequately in Afghanistan."

Time's Joe Klein asks, "McCain -- Soft on Al Qaeda?"

Comments

[Sumocat]

So let me get this straight: McCain will pursue Osama Bin Laden through the gates of Hell (which makes no sense since that's where we want Bin Laden to go), but he won't go after him in Pakistan without permission? Looks like W. logic to me.

[Ozarks]

Bombing Al Qaeda hideouts in Pakistan would sure be more cost effective than spending 9 billion a month in Iraq and another 10 billion a year supporting that worthless Dictator Musharraf. This is a typical republican tactic developed by Carl Rove. Tell a lie so big that it is sure to be believed. McCain disappoints me by reverting to Bush tactics actually used on him in South Carolina in 1999.
The recent election in Pakistan shows Musharref days are numbered. Supporting Musharref, who has made deals with Al Qaeda, and spending tons of money in Iraq is way beyond naive. It is the ole failed Washington lock step going the way of the Dodo bird. John McCain's argument that his experience is his trump card over Obama's alleged naivete' is going in the same toilet as Hillary's duplicate argument.
McCain is just a Bush Wannabe setting up permanent bases in Iraq and continuing Bush/Repulican fear politics for the next 100 years. Rove and McCain's big lie tactics can fool some of the people all the time and all the people some of the time.But, this big lie tactic has run its course. So long to you McCain and your Rove big lie tactics.

[KenBenobi]

Here, Here and HERE again!!! John McCain in his new, post-Rove castrated self has officially become the total, complete and utter disappointment that his own Party has labeled him -- He is now the town idiot and idealogical traitor to EVERYONE on BOTH SIDES of the AISLE. MR. "I JUST VOTED FOR TORTURE LAST WEEK" --- MISTER "BOMB-BOMB-IRAN" just sits there and lets his "advisors" pawn this WEAK BULLSH*T off as good strategy!?!? What a colossal old FOOL he's turning out to be -- to think he was once regarded as a "maverick" and a "common-sense alternative" to the lost droves of GOP zombies. Time to fire your staff -- AHHHGAIN -- John. You are TOAST in November!!!!

[BlackJAC]

"Pardon me, sir, but would you mind terribly if I landed several hundred live air-dropped Paveways and JDAMs on your property, causing large amounts of death and destruction--with your permission, of course." So that's why Iraq's such a clusterf$#k: we never asked Saddam if we could attack!

Having Alzheimer's is not a selling point when you're running for The Guy With The Nuclear Launch Codes, John.

[PuffAndStuff]

Maybe McBomb is losing his mind. It's difficult to know for certain: are his untruths the intentional campaign maligning of his opponent -- or -- does he just not remember the truth of what Obama actually did or didn't say?

How little is really known -- or should I say, has been disclosed -- about the reality of Reagan's true clarity capacity during his last 1-2 years in office.

[PuffAndStuff]

Oh, yeah and a postscript to the above ...

One major difference, I actually liked/like Nancy Reagan and would be somewhat comfortable in the thought of her 'covering' for him if he was beginning to lose sensibility -- however, the idea of Cindy McCain being in that position .... not so much, there's something about her that seems quite swarmy.

[rollingdivision]

Haven't seen bombing Pakistan documented. But, Obama is clearly saying he would stop what the US military is doing in Iraq, no question we have boots of the ground, and start doing it in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Boots off the ground in Iraq "getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan" troops moved into Afghanistan and Pakistan. Actually, Obama is a neophyte and doesn't seem to understand the full ramifications of many of his prepared speeches. So, maybe he really didn't mean what was written for him in the speech.

"When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: GETTING OUT OF IRAQ AND ON TO THE RIGHT BATTLEFIELD IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.
THE FIRST STEP MUST BE GETTING OFF THE WRONG BATTLEFIELD IN IRAQ, AND TAKING THE FIGHT TO THE TERRORISTS IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN.
I introduced a plan in January that would have already started bringing our troops out of Iraq, with a goal of removing all combat brigades by March 31, 2008. If the President continues to veto this plan, then ending this war will be my first priority when I take office."

[foreffectivegovernment]

Here's more Republican Swiftboating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Her_Now

[joselopez]

Question: If we have intelligence that tells us Osama Bin Laden is in the mountain region of Pakistan, and Musharaf tells us we can't go get him, do we let him go?

That was the question, Barack said we will get the man (missle strike) who killed three thousand of our fellow Americans.

Is my friend John and Hillary for that matter, saying they will not go after Bin Laden?

I thought John said he would follow him into the gates of Hell!!!!

[joselopez]

Funny how the guy they say has the least experience got Iraq right (not going in in the first place) and he got it right on Pakistan (if they refuse to help us get Osama).

It comes down to judgment, and good judgment is what Obama has and it seems his opponents lack.

[rollingdivision]

Obama's official position advocates executions based on actionable intelligence. Haven't we had lots of problems with bad intelligence? Or in other words, sending a hellfire missile or a Special Forces team into Pakistan to kill innocent people without any sort of hearing, trial or due process is "OK"? Hell they'd be better off in GITMO. And the reason this would be "ok" is........­?

[ZsaZsa]

John McCain is a lying liar from Liarsburg.

[lungfish]

LOL!!!

[MajorKong]

That's different, a Republican accusing someone of wanting to bomb people.

[LaFilleEnRose]

And wasn't it Bush who recently bombed Pakistan and got the number 3 Al Queda guy. After saying Obama was nuts to want to do that, a few months later he does exactly that. What is McCain going on about. Bush just did what Obama has said needs doing. I think Obama is already running the show. Everything he says comes about.

[ObamaEdwards]

WOW! If McCain's hair were dark, and he had a mustache painted over his lip, he would look EXACTLY like Hitler in this photo. Now, that's an image we want to project to the world, isn't it? His angel-wife is missing from this pic, but she's almost always in the frame these days--her glowing blond head sort of HOVERING over his shoulder like a divine presence..­.or maybe the soul of Eva Braun.

[desertdweller]

Now that's a scary thought!

[iPolitics]

Musharraf's party lost elections in Pakistan. How do we know they are still "allies"? By the way, Bin Laden has been hiding there since 9/11. With friends like these who needs enemies. Just like Saudi Arabia!

[fearwig]

Bhutto's party is openly pro-American.

[lungfish]

and McMummy wants to bomb Iran... where does this guy get his talking points? A posterchild for senility..­.

[hannabanana]

I guess McCrazy hasn't read a newspaper lately otherwise he'd know that his pal the little chimp just had the CIA do what he is accusing Obama of perhaps doing.

[TexasDem0]

John McCain, who never stops beating the war drum, is outraged that Barack Obama will get to bomb Pakistan and he won’t. How can anyone take Senator 100-years-in-Iraq seriously? That is, other than the masses of GOP voters who don’t think, don’t collect facts, and religiously vote against their own best interests.

[lynnn]

Wow this is the twilight zone, A republican who does not want to go after the terrorist. Uhm!!!??1!!!1!

If we don't go after the terrorists, don't the terrorist win?

[FogBelter]

I'm waiting to see McCain have an "event" and start screaming obscenities in Vietnamese through clenched teeth at the crowd he is addressing.

[TexasDem0]

Choi oi, tat ca dan chu ga dien!