Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

3 comments |  Print | E-Mail Top Press Commentary  


McCain Strong, Obama Weak

D. Rivkin Jr. & L. Casey, Advisors to McCain | October 6, 2008

Osama Bin Laden called Iraq the "central front" in his fight against the US - he was right. ++ Obama/Biden only focus on the past; they still think invading Iraq was a mistake, a distraction from Afghanistan. ++ Their obsession misses the point: "The essence of being a good commander in chief is appreciating the connections among these theaters." ++ FDR fought the Nazi's before assailing Japan, despite Japan attacking first; this wasn't a distraction, nor was Iraq. ++ If Obama negotiates with Iran he will fail; but McCain, he will succeed.

 

 
Tags: | McCain | Obama | Biden | Palin | strategy | Iraq | Iran | Afghanistan | bin Laden | al-Qaeda |
 
Comments
Cameron Michael Von Berg

Sat, Oct 11th 2008, 04:08

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I admire your spirit but your statement is very presumptuous. Based on Palin's slamming of Obama's plan to openly speak with leaders like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without making him comply to condition before talks *see http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1220444324228&pagename=J... I find McCain's approach to be a bit "old-school". Obama would be showing respect to another leader, which is a surprisingly new approach. McCain, on the other hand, would be showing disrespect immediately by making them conform.
With regards to the US invasion of Iraq, we had no legal grounds! The American people have begun to lose sight of what we were supposed to do: find Usama, learn all we can from Usama, and then kill Usama. "We will not tire. We will not falter. . . " We have faltered, esteemed author. Usama wasn't in Iraq. Please take not of this anecdote: At my 16th birthday party my friends and I were playing pictionary. My parents came up with the topics. A friend of mine had to indicate threw drawing what the topic was. He went through a few pictures and nothing worked. He then drew the twin towers on fire. Suddenly somebody shouted out the answer and he was correct. "Sadam Hussein!". I felt very disappointed: firstly, because he thought to draw the twin towers to indicate Sadam, and secondly because somebody else understood it to be Sadam. So what if Usama said the central front will be in Iraq. That doesn't mean Usama is there! Napolean wasn't at Waterloo when he lost! We need to return the focus back on the terrorist organizations and root them out. We need to be respectful of other countries while we do it, as we would want them to be of us. We must uphold the "innocent until proven guilty" ideal. Please, let's stay American and not Imperialistic.
 
Meredith L. Nicoll

Sun, Oct 12th 2008, 10:20

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Thank you Cameron for your comment! I, personally, was really hoping someone would write something here about that article.
The fact that the outrageous arguments in this article can even make it into the WSJ blew my mind, but it also shows how Americans thrive off of this comparison with WWII and Iraq.

I made a comment that has to do with the same topic here: http://www.atlantic-community.org/index/articles/view/Robert_Kagan%...

Why can't people just not see the differences, the massive differences between the two?
 
Sepideh  Parsa

Sun, Oct 12th 2008, 17:13

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Meredith, I agree and I think there is a general fear of giving chances to new approaches. People should take a moment and seriously reflect on what new strategies might offer. Of course- success is never guaranteed but I don't understand why anyone would want to keep supporting a government and policies that have failed to succeed.There is an urgent need for a completely different course of American politics. Talking to leaders of so called "rogue states" will not be a challenge that can easily be handled but it is the only diplomatic action left that might result in building up new relations. We have seen what happens if an American President strictly refuses to exploit alternatives!

"Having a president try and fail fundamentally damages the nation's own credibility." So the author of the article seriously thinks that G.W Bushs Afghanistan/Iraq policy has not damaged America's credibility???! But new approaches by a possible Obama/Biden administration will?! Really?????????
 

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org


Community

You are in the archive of all articles published on atlantic-community.org from 2007 to 2012. To read the latest articles from our open think tank and network with community members, please go to our new website