In a few months Barack Obama will square off against John McCain and inevitably the subject of foreign policy and national security will arise. Next to a decorated Vietnam War vet, Obama risks being painted as a neophyte with a flimsy résumé who's unfit to be commander in chief. But he should relish the chance to debate McCain on U.S. foreign policy. Here's why:
McCain hammers home the notion that he has been right all along about Iraq, from sacking Rumsfeld to surging into Baghdad. That is complete bunk. McCain has treated the war as a public relations stunt to boost his candidacy, from the "Mission Accomplished"-style walk through a Baghdad market last spring to the overly rosy picture painted by his gung-ho speeches on Iraq. The fact is, violence is down because of the ethnic cleansing of once-mixed neighborhoods and a bargain struck by a handful of Sunni elders in late 2006, not because of 20,000-or-so additional U.S. troops sent to Iraq. McCain is taking credit for something that was not his -- or the U.S. military's -- doing. In so doing, he is obscuring the fact that the war shows no signs of concluding. If no political reconciliation is reached by 2009, how can he then look Americans in the face and say that an escalation of the war was worth it? Obama should seize this opportunity to portray McCain as out-of-touch with average Americans but also with the reality on the ground in Iraq.
But he should be more specific on how he would exit Iraq. First, he should suggest staging an over-the-horizon force in Kurdistan to keep the peace there should the Turks decide to invade or the Kurds decide to secede. The Kurds are the only Iraqis practically begging us to build permanent bases there. Also, he should scrap timetables and benchmarks for Baghdad to meet, which just tells the average Iraqi that their government is a puppet of Washington. For the Iraqi government to gain credibility, it must be seen as independent of the Americans.
Secondly, on Iran, McCain is about as hawkish as they come. And that's dangerous. McCain's anti-Russian stance virtually guarantees that Moscow would not agree to any meaningful sanctions against Tehran. Meanwhile, Russians are the ones supplying Iranian reactors with their nuclear fuel. Go figure. Obama should present the case for negotiating directly with the Iranians on the issue of nukes (in addition to Iraq) at the level of foreign minister or higher (Obama should also clean house at the State Department, whose Iran desk is headed by a self-declared "neo-con"). I'm not saying he should cut the tape on a new American embassy in downtown Tehran, but reaching out to the Iranians just might halt their nuclear fuel cycle.
McCain is also hawkish on the war on terror and repeats the mantra that the struggle against Islamic extremism is the struggle of our generation. He might be right. But his views on this are a mixture of cold realism and ugly neo-conservatism. He would not close Guantanamo. He would not stop eavesdropping on U.S. citizens. He would use the GWOT guise to keep supplemental war spending packages at record levels. All Obama needs to say to the American people is "enough" -- we can win the war on terror without sacrificing our ideals as a nation of immigrants and going broke in the process.
Finally, in his ads Obama should loop footage of McCain calling Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf a "good ally" and a "very honest person" who has made "mistakes." Obama should advocate reaching out to the moderates that the Pakistani people just voted for, even at the risk of alienating the military establishment in Islamabad. For $10 billion, the Americans should get a better return on their investment. McCain would just keep cutting the checks, no questions asked.
All of which is a wordy way of saying: McCain is out of touch on the biggest foreign policy issues of the day. Obama promises a change of course, a fresh start to a foreign policy gone amok. He may not have served in uniform or known as many foreign leaders personally, but he understands that a continuation of Bush's bellicose policies abroad is the wrong way to go.
Barack Obama is inspirationially VAGUE about what he's going to "change" for a good reason: Not because he has no ideas, but because you would probably HATE them. Unless Mussolini is your hero, then by all means vote for him and his warcriminal cabinet and it's global domination agenda. FOOLS.
From Accuracy in Media:
Obama's communist connection adds to mounting public concern about a candidate who has come out of virtually nowhere, with a brief U.S. Senate legislative record, to become the Democratic Party frontrunner for the U.S. presidency. In the latest Real Clear Politics poll average, Obama beats Republican John McCain by almost four percentage points.
AIM recently disclosed that Obama has well-documented socialist connections, which help explain why he sponsored a "Global Poverty Act" designed to send hundreds of billions of dollars of U.S. foreign aid to the rest of the world, in order to meet U.N. demands. The bill has passed the House and a Senate committee, and awaits full Senate action.
But the Communist Party connection through Davis is even more ominous. Decades ago, the CPUSA had tens of thousands of members, some of them covert agents who had penetrated the U.S. Government. It received secret subsidies from the old Soviet Union.
You won't find any of this discussed in the David Mendell book, Obama: From Promise to Power. It is typical of the superficial biographies of Obama now on the market. Secret smoking seems to be Obama's most controversial activity. At best, Mendell and the liberal media describe Obama as "left-leaning."
Read the whole thing here:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/
According to the strict interpretation of Islamic law Barrack Hussein Obama born of a Moslem father is an apostate from Islam: a capital crime punishable by death as Obama is a practicing Christian. According to Islamic law Obama's Moslem father obligates him to practice Islam and no other religion. This makes Obama an enemy of Allah and his prophet, as his apostasy from the faith is a repudiation of fundamental Islamic values and beliefs. In other words, an Obama presidency would be seen as an affront and insult to Moslems everywhere and be exploited by Jihadists to energize their movement and win over new recruits.
Worse still, with the Iranian parliament on the verge of passing an Apostate Law-making apostasy a capital state crime in accordance with Sharia-there is no way that the mullahs could hold direct, open talks with an apostate president or any member of his administration. The Moslem world would view such talks as legitimizing Obama's apostasy thus bringing ridicule, contempt and shame on the mullah regime. As the mullahs are trying to win over Moslems to its brand of Shiite Islam negotiations with an apostate US president would be a public relations disaster and defeat their purpose.
To be sure, if Obama should win in November his inauguration will be marked by massive anti-US demonstrations in all major Moslem cities calling for the death of the US and its newly elected apostate president. As US relations with Islam is bad enough we simply cannot afford four years of Barack Hussein Obama.
The media,which has failed miserably so far, might redeem themselves a bit by researching who is in the Obama brain trust (assuming he has one) and what they think about some of the more pressing issues conronting us, as opposed to strewing flowers in the path of the "hope and change" bandwagon.
Glowing reports of how many "cheering, placard-waving supporters packed such and so arena shouting Yes WE Can!" will not stampede general election voters as easily Democratic primary voters.
Unlike many of his Republican counterparts, John McCain will not be credibly depicted as an extreme right-wing conservative (witness the recent attacks on him from the RIGHT).
In point of fact, on the social issues (choice, immigation and many others) McCain and Obama are not that far apart.
When it comes to national security issues:.... identity politics, and vague platitudes will not suffice to persuade voters to entrust the Presidency to Obama.
History shows that given a choice between a Republican and Republican lite voters will choose the genuine article every time........................................tm
If this country and its rulers really knew people and the history of Middle East the best this country can do for its own future with Middle East and its oil security against the rising Russia , Asia and the Europe ( as Europe is getting larger it will be a bigger competition for US then China ) it is a new beginning
A new black and sincere American president who has arisen from discriminated slaved minority and has never been part of the established American foreign policy, he can be viewed in Middle Easterners masses as some one who can be honest and can be a sincere change, Obama will need to declare a policy of non interference non intervention and a genuine big apology for 60 years of intervention on in their affairs this could sink in every Middle Eastern hearth and will make possible a new start.
If this country and its rulers really knew people and the history of Middle East the best this country can do for its own future with Middle East and its oil security against the rising Russia , Asia and the Europe ( as Europe is getting larger it will be a bigger competition for US then China ) it is a new beginning
A new black and sincere American president who has arisen from discriminated slaved minority and has never been part of the established American foreign policy, he can be viewed in Middle Easterners masses as some one who can be honest and can be a sincere change, Obama will need to declare a policy of non interference non intervention and a genuine big apology for 60 years of intervention on in their affairs this could sink in every Middle Eastern hearth and will make possible a new start.
I have to read it one more time
There are two stages before political irrelevancy.
First the politician becomes the object of derision and then they become the object of pity. That is where HRC finds herself.
Hey, call me silly, but doesn’t her campaign remind you of the war in Iraq.
Bush was fixated on winning Baghdad, thinking that constituted victory and gave little thought to the aftermath.
HRC was fixated on winning Super Tuesday, feeling confident that she would have it wrapped up by then, so why bother with the caucus states.
Bush thought that the Iraqi people wanted democracy but what they really wanted was security.
HRC thought the American people wanted experience, but what they really wanted was change.
Bush thought that since he had the support of the Chalabis the support of the Iraqi people would follow.
HRC thought that if she had the support of the Rangels and Youngs, she would have the support of a core constituency.
Both Bush and HRC can be faulted for hiring people based on loyalty and a distant, secondarily, competence.
Neither Bush nor HRC can be accused of admitting errors.
Neither can be accused of humility.
Both feel that if you are not with them, you are against them.
Bush calls his enemies evil.
HRC threatens to “demonize” those who question her wisdom.
All of this is so old school!
Well a political Tsunami is sweeping across this land and I am reminded of a Dylan line, “Something is happening here and you don’t know what it is, do you Mr. Jones!”
Skycontrol 02/20/08
If the debate is moved to oil instead of terror and spreading democracy, the GOP can't win, especially since there is good evidence that the war was meant to prevent Iraq from pumping too much oil and driving the price down.
Google Iraq hydrocarbon law oil and gas journal.
Obama wants to increase troop levels (by 92,000), just like McCain.
Obama would illegally bomb other countries looking for terrorists, just like McCain.
Obama wants to keep the illegal economic sanctions on Cuba...you guessed it, just like McCain.
Obama is siding with the occupier Israel as against the oppressed Palestinian people, again, just like McCain.
Coke or Pepsi? That's your choice in 08.
What I have been saying to others, who look at me as some kind of trader (huh look @ the name)
Not that the extra soldiers didn't have any hand, but Al Sadr is the one who took the wind out of the sails of the violence there on the ground.
I had wished we had taken him out back in 2004 when we had the chance. Thinking those Neocons are really CHICKENS!!!
All the photos I see of Obama look like "Ted Haggard" head of a MEGA-CHURCH. I really resent my democratic party being taken over by this false prophet. He has everyone in my party believing he can win because he is the second coming. This is soooooooooooo CREEPY. He will not win because some of us will take a nap instead of going to church and we want a grown-up to be in charge of the red button.
One thing Europeans have criticized Americans for is what they see of us now - too religious and self indulgent. After the reality of the german experience, they will never trust an American president who exhibits this kind of character.
WHAT Policy?!
Obama has no foreign policy insight besides what his handlers tell him to say.
Because he knows nothing about foreign policy; no more than Bush did during his 2000 campaign.
Another weak green-horn President would spell a disaster for America.
together, Bush and Hillary were wrong about Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, and Pakistan, (well Hillary was anyways, because it turns out that when Hillary and Bush were chastizing Obama for suggesting he would go after Bin Laden in the uncontrolled border regions in Pakistan without permission, The Pentagon had sent special forces into the border regions to kill al qeada leaders without consent.
I would ask, what foreign policy call has Hillary ever gotten RIGHT?
Go Obama!!!!
You KNOW?!
This basically sumes up the archetypal Obama supporter: some kind of freaky cult of personality.
For them Obama's virgin birth (as it were) is beyond discussion: Obama the Immaculate, Obama the Just... honestly, it's a little freaky.
Funny, how Obama of Oz took 1/4 million dollars from a nuclear power company and then vigorously supported and voted YES on Cheney's enery bill. NICE.
Obama comment on Cuba: "Castro's decision "...should mark the end of a dark era in Cuba's history."
Nice going pimpin' for Florida's Cuban fascist vote.
Progressive? America shifted so much to the right that a petty bourgeois politico like Obama is considered progressive!
RIDICULOUS
In the fall he stated that if he had actionable intelligence, he would go after the terrorists in Pakistan, with or without permission.
McCain attacked him as naive.
In January our forces did exactly that. They took out Abu Laith al-Libi, a wanted al Qaeda terrorist.