pk500 wrote:
Understood. But Bush entered office in January 2001 with zero foreign policy experience yet was authorizing military action against Afghanistan -- and rightfully so -- within nine months of taking the oath.
Unless we only elect veterans of the CIA or Congress or turn to a military junta, we're going to put people in the top two positions of the executive branch fairly regularly who lack foreign policy experience. The recent list is long: Carter, Reagan, Quayle (don't think he was on any intelligence or military committees in Congress), Clinton, Bush Jr.
Take care,
PK
I agree with that, which is why I can still support Obama. But nobody would deny that he has studied the issues extensively and talked to many people who have foreign policy experience. And what's come out of that is his general philosophy on foreign policy which I think shows he knows his stuff. The most obvious example being his speech in 2002 which laid out all the reasons we shouldn't have gone to war. So don't try to make the argument that she is just as well versed as Obama on foreign policy matters. When you read these speeches you know that both McCain and Obama have thought long and hard on the conflict in Iraq as I would expect from someone applying to be commander and chief. Biden has as well. I just thought it would be a requirement for the vice president.
Now these speeches are just speeches and I'm not saying we can predict the future from these words but we both know where McCain and Obama stand and they both made value judgments and interpreted the data and came to their conclusions. I think we can learn something about how they would handle conflicts in the future.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Ob ... raq_Speech
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne...
He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.
So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings...
The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not — we will not — travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.
Contrast it with McCain:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Remarks_b ... on_of_Iraq
But I felt it would be important for me to respond to allegations concerning the United States of America, its status in the world, and, in particular, what happens after this conflict is over, which I do not think we have paid enough attention to, perhaps understandably, because our first and foremost consideration is the welfare of the young men and women we are sending in harm's way. But to allege that somehow the United States of America has demeaned itself or tarnished its reputation by being involved in liberating the people of Iraq, to me, simply is neither factual nor fair...
We entered into those conflicts because we could not stand by and watch innocent men, women, and children being slaughtered, raped, and "ethnically cleansed." We found a new phrase for our lexicon: "ethnic cleansing." Ethnic cleansing is a phrase which has incredible implications...
The mission our military is about to embark on is fraught with danger, and it means the loss of brave young American lives. But I also believe it offers the opportunity for a new day for the Iraqi people...
And contrary to the assertion of the Senator from West Virginia, when the people of Iraq are liberated, we will again have written another chapter in the glorious history of the United States of America, that we will fight for the freedom of other citizens of the world, and we again assert the most glorious phrase, in my view, ever written in the English language; and that is: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...
It is not an easy decision to send America's young men and women into harm's way. As I said before, some of them will not be returning. But to somehow assert, as some do, that the people of Iraq and the Middle East are not entitled to those same God-given rights that Americans and people all over the country are, that they do not have those same hopes and dreams and aspirations our own citizens do, to me, is a degree of condescension....
So I respectfully disagree with the remarks of the Senator from West Virginia. I believe the President of the United States has done everything necessary and has exercised every option short of war, which has led us to the point we are today.
I believe that, obviously, we will remove a threat to America's national security because we will find there are still massive amounts of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
