McCain Won't Rule Out Pre-Emptive War

WESTPORT, Conn. — Republican Sen. John McCain refused Wednesday to rule out a pre-emptive war against another country, although he said one would be very unlikely.

The likely Republican presidential nominee was asked Wednesday at a town-hall style meeting if he would reject "the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war," a reference to Bush's decision to invade Iraq without it having attacked the United States.

"I don't think you could make a blanket statement about pre-emptive war, because obviously, it depends on the threat that the United States of America faces," McCain told his audience at Bridgewater Associates Inc., a global investment firm.

"If someone is about to launch a weapon that would devastate America, or have the capability to do so, obviously, you would have to act immediately in defense of this nation's national security interests."

McCain said he would consult more closely and more carefully "not with every member of Congress, but certainly the leaders of Congress."

The Iraq war was in the spotlight this week as Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander there, gave Congress a status report on the war. McCain argues for keeping troops in Iraq to capitalize on security gains, despite a recent outbreak of violence. His Democratic rivals, Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton argue for withdrawing troops.

Comments

[whizkid]

It would seem if our news media had told us the truth Bush would have never been president
and we would never have invaded Iraq.
No doubt about it.
Ask Chris Matthews to ask David Broder to pass the salt.

[WLA]

Ask Bill Kristol to walk the plank.

[ProgressiveBum]

What a dangerous senile old man! By McCain's logic he would've nuked the Soviet Union, as they had ICBMs with nukes. Pre-emptive war is illegal by the Geneva Convention definition. So is torture. Hopefully the voters are smart enough to put him out of his misery come November.

[BlueStateMan]

Hopefully the voters will put him out of OUR misery come November.

[msfiskvletterman]

4/10/08
5:50am
Alexandria, VA

Any violation of a treaty signed by the USA is a violation of our Constitution.

Anyway, that's the way I read it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[davesideas]

don't see the correlation between treaties and the Constitution? other than establishing the process by which they shall be derived...

[lefilmnoir]

He's probably too senile to lie and do the old "humble foreign policy" routine.

[ROBOT8]

YES, LET'S KILL THE CHILDREN FIRST!!!!!!!! BECAUSE SOMEDAY THEY MAY NOT LIKE US???? LET'S KILL EVERYONE AND WHEN WE ARE DOWN TO THE LAST 2-3 PEOPLE THEY CAN FIRGHT TO THE DEATH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO McCANE!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!! AND ALWAYS REMEMBER..­...... WAR IS PEACE....S­LAVERY IS FREEDOM...­..... IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH..­..........­...

"When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” -Sinclair Lewis
ten steps that "fascist, totalitarian, and other repressive leaders [employ to] seize and maintain power, especially in what were once democracie­s.” The ten steps are:
1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
2. Create a gulag
3. Develop a thug caste
4. Set up an internal surveillance system
5. Harass citizens' groups
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
7. Target key individuals
8. Control the press
9. Dissent equals treason
10. Suspend the rule of law
naomi wolfe

[whizkid]

Can I have multiple under age wives too?
Cause its part of my religion and all.
Don't worry bout me with all those terrorists out there someplace.­.

[billysviez]

WOW Robot8, we are 10 for 10 and geting worse. it scares the hell out of me. to think many poor and average Americans will vote for Mcbush scares me even more. how can We get Our Country back?

[Ramirez]

If it's really 10 for 10, you can't.

[Lisette]

McCain has a few loose screws

[radlib1]

Unfortunately, those "loose screws" can vote.

[NoahVail]

"...McCain refused Wednesday to rule out a pre-emptive war against another country, although he said one would be very unlikely."

You are God-damned right it is very unlikely-- because its highly unlikely he will get elected.

[sqwerl]

Obama said he will invade pakistan, why aren't the liberals bashing him for his warmongering?

[WLA]

Stop with the weak bullshit talking points and educate yourself. Obama said that IF he had actionable information on the whereabouts of Bin Laden and wasn't going to get the help of the Pakistani government, he would consider an operation.

Please stop spouting useless nonsense trying to obfuscate. Go spread that manure where people buy it.

[conscioushope]

Get real, Sqwerl....­.......

[sparkandy]

This is exactly why he WILL get elected.

[BlueStateMan]

Riiiiiiiii­ght.......­...

The American people (85% by last count) think what Bush did was the blunder of all blunders..­.. & McCain promises MORE of the same.

Come November, the GOP (those that aren't under indictment) will be nothing more than the remnants of a bad dream.

[whizkid]

They'll feed us polls. All your most trusted talking heads will tell you they're true.
Despite exit data, a half million ballots here and there will go uncounted.
McCain wins but a Pope John Paul happens early 2009.
Lieberman or Rice take the helm.
Then watch.

Listen....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GRR_n_yQGA&feature=related

[vinny]

death and hatred for mankind.

bush's legacy.

[kanyingi]

McCain is a warlord with serious memory issues.

If he becomes the next POTUS, God help us all.

[mamacat]

Between 1776 and 1989, the United States were not the sole superpower in the world. During those 213 years, the U.S. did not advance as policy the right to attack any nation that threatened to become as powerful as the U.S.

Since 1989, the neo-cons have adopted as policy the right of America to attack any country, at will, if they are labeled a threat to American power. This is a self-proclaimed right to pre-emptive warfare.

Bush and McCain do not exist in isolation. They are part of a political organisation that has proclaimed the right of the President of the U.S. to be above the other parts of the U.S. government, and the right of elites to be above everyone else in the country. By proclaiming the right to preemptive war, they have proclaimed the right of the U.S. to dictate to the rest of the world what they can and cannot do. The President is not yet strong enough to enforce his policies, but he and McCain have pronounced to the world what they intend.

We should learn some lessons from history, and try to believe that Bush and McCain are sincere in their statements. If the world had believed what Hitler wrote in "Mein Kampf," maybe they would have stood up to him sooner.

[Ramirez]

And that's why we have Godwin's Law.

[GoreyFantod]

Um, no. First of all, Godwin's Law isn't actually a law in the sense that it's part of the civil or criminal code. Second, it doesn't preclude ever mentioning Hitler or the NSDAP in the context of discussing history and/or its relationship to current affairs.

"The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact."

Perhaps you should read it, rather than merely flinging it in the form of an accusation. Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law

[NoahVail]

No, you can invoke Godwin's law, only when the argument is that the other side is equivalent to Hitler. In this case it is merely an historical reference.

In fact he is quite correct in his analysis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive
Bush has brought some real scum into his administration, for example, fascist Korean John Yoo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//John_Yoo] and toady Alberto Gonzales http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//Alberto_Gonzales]. If you think these guys represent the best America has to offer and American ideals, then you are probably a fascist, too.

What Bush and his neo-Con buddies are arguing is that during times of war the President trumps the other two branches of government, and since we have a "global war on terror" that will continue ad infinitum, then we have dictatorship ad infinitum.

If you believe in the Constitution of the United States, and the Declaration of Independence, then you should be very concerned about this. The Declaration of Independence says that it is not only our right, but our duty to overthrow oppressive governments. This can be done at the ballot box, but I am worried that with the media in the hands of corporations and foreign fascists (e.g. Rupert Murdoch), that we may not easily be able to effect such a change.

Think it can't happen? Think they have not tried it before? Read about Smedley Butler, my personal hero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

[WillPower]

Don't forget that the Senate and the UN approved our war with Iraq. And don't give me that "Bush lied" crap. Everyone thought Saddam had a WMD program.
http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

[Greup]

Bush lied. It was known that no evidence was found before the war. Hans Blix repeatedly said that all info he got from the US about locations for WMDs were wrong.

The war was never for WMDs in the first place. It was for oil.

[GoreyFantod]

I don't think that you have the same definition of "everyone" that the rest of us do.

I didn't think for a second that Iraq still had stockpiles of biological or chemical weapons after the first Gulf War. U.N. Weapons Inspectors made it quite clear that he did not before Bush forced them to withdraw under threat of death by, "Shock & Awe." Nor did I believe that he ever had, "a smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud."

A great many of us figured out well before the coronation of 2000 that Bush and Cheney are greedy lying warmongers who can and will do anything to further their own selfish, amoral interests.

[SanityNowPlease]

Actually, you are wrong. Our Congress and Senate voted to empower the Commander In Chief to use military force if it was found that the WMDs existed. The only way we would know if they did would have been to let the IAEA to complete in-country investigations. That was all the UN agreed to as well. And not "everyone" thought Iraq had WMDs. Reliable intelligence could find no evidence. Executive-contrived evidence was the justification, all of which was later debunked. This is undisputed now.

Bush/Cheney, armed with the note from the Congress/Senate that its OK to use force, conveniently jumped the gun, sorry for the pun. Of course, once hostilities had started, not much anyone could do except totally commit.

[SanityNowPlease]

It is worse than that, mama. With this new doctrine of preemptive war, they have made We The People nearly irrelevant. Our only hope is to VOTE in MASSIVE NUMBERS. Tell all your freinds. No one should not vote if they have the right. And they should not just vote this one time, but keep voting every chance they get.

Go mama.

[jimmyaj]

What will he do for an army? The US Army will be stationed around the world guarding oil pipelines (pipelines that won't even go to the US).

If he takes the easy way out and nukes everything, that won't help. So who's he trying to fool?

[Cybersquirt]

"although he said one would be very unlikely" Gosh! I feel safer already!

[researcher]

let the so called war hero have his war. he enjoyed bombing women and children in vietnam to earn the respect of his father and grandfathers. now he needs a win to gain that respect. they are up in heaven saying to him please start a war so you can earn our respect.

he picked the right country to be pres. we americans are imperialists and many are war mongers. until we look into a mirror and see that in our culture we will continue to blame our politicans.

and as mc war stated we will continue to have wars.

does iran have oil?

bomb bomb iran will be our new national song. as long as we have the south we will have plenty of parents to supply us with kids to fight these illegal wars. oh the benefits of cousins marrying cousins.

when you call your soldiers heros for fighting in illegal wars that americans is imperialism.

the iraqis will bleed us dry in wounded fighters and our economic system will fail. starting to now. the vietnamese kicked our butts out of their country maybe the iraqis have to courage to do the same.

I will be called a traitor for stating that but the true traitors to this country are the war mongers doing fear mongerng for profits. even corp media are imperialists.

[GoreyFantod]

Count me as someone who would never call you a traitor. On the contrary, I believe you're demonstrating love and understanding of our founding principles by demanding that we, as a nation, live up to them.

On the other hand, the White House and Congress are filled with traitors who betrayed our Constitution for nothing more than re-election & the proverbial thirty pieces of silver.

This country desperately needs a nationally televised, live-streamed civics course followed closely by a Constitutional Congress. Then I'd make Election Day a national holiday, de-couple voter registration from jury duty and mandate voting in federal elections.

[poco767]

Amazing, nearly every post here has nothing to do with McCain, but rather the Obama and Clinton masterpiece theater.
McCain is right not to rule out preemptive strikes, it is a vital tool in any nations arsenal.
It was a preemptive strike against Nazi Germany, preemptive does not necessarily mean wrong.
What is worrying is this
"If someone is about to launch a weapon that would devastate America, or have the capability to do so, obviously, you would have to act immediately"
I understand what he means, but this blanket generalization encompasses Israel, India, Japan, Great Britain and Russia among others, all of whom posses the capability, but not the intent to "devastate America"

[kdogg]

we didn't launch a preemptive strike against the germans.

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Yeah, there was that little matter of Pearl Harbor. Not to mention the Germans had been sinking American supply ships because we were providing support to the allies. There was nothing preemptive about WWII.

[MikeMidCity]

The camel's nose of preemptive war is in the tent.

[GoreyFantod]

"All of us have heard this term 'preventive war' since the earliest days of Hitler...I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."

- President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953

"To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

- Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, 1946

I'll stand in agreement with them on this issue rather than McWarmonger.

[whizkid]

poco
We like theatre.
McCain's jack off posture about a jack off hypothetical attack by some jack off country is for jack offs.
We have the best defense system in the world. Or pay for one anyway.
Just cause Bush was pickin' boogers on 9/11 doesn't mean Johnny Hoosier should
jump and die everywhere.

[GnitenGoodLk]

Scratch Russia from your list. They have intent.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/04/airforce_pacaf_040608/

[whizkid]

Odd how Obama supporters think all their trials will be a result of the devilish Clintons.

Had the Twelve spun suspicous of John the Baptist without a thought of what awaited in Jerusalem.

[AdLib]

Odd how Repugs who claim to be Christians never quote Jesus...wh­ose last name, I'm told, is the root of the name of the religion.

Peace, love, turn the other cheek instead of fighting and war, etc., guess it's just not convenient when you want to hate and kill so many people.

[Nyland8]

lol

I don't think it's his last name. I think it's his title.

That and "Lord of Lords - King of Kings"

... and others I'm sure.

8

[Cybersquirt]

Huh?

[Veman]

Just a thought here folks . . . even assuming the distinguished gentleman from AZ gets into the WH, don't We, The People, have a say as to whether we get into any kind of war; whether by some Executive Order or otherwise? I mean, this is still Our country right? We still have a voice, right? We still know how to make that voice heard thru peaceful protest, conscientious objection, petitions for change, calls for impeachment, and so forth, right? C'mon, someone, anyone? If Obama can raise umpteen millions of dollars in a day, surely enough of us who are of like mind could prevent "Our" government from getting into another boneheaded war - no? I know the Patriot Act is protecting us from those who would exercise our civil liberties against us, but last time I checked the 1st Amendment is still intact. And if we did bellow a grand , collective, "NO, MORE WAR" and push did come to shove . . . they couldn't shoot all of us . . . could they, would they?

[Nyland8]

Point taken. We could grind the entire country to a halt - and as soon as the "real business interests" were threatened, McCain would be castrated. We've always had the power.

It's the best kept secret in America.

8

[Ramirez]

Got the power but lack the will.

If you had the will Bush would be impeached.