| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 6:28 pm Post subject: DID BARACK OBAMA TAKE A PAGE FROM THE BUSH PLAYBOOK? |
 |
|
Judge for yourself:
| Quote: |
Pakistan criticizes Obama on comments
By MUNIR AHMAD, AP, Islamabad
Pakistan criticized U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday for saying that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes against terrorists hiding in this Islamic country.
Top Pakistan officials said Obama's comment was irresponsible and likely made for political gain in the race for the Democratic nomination.
"It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say," Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri told AP Television News. "As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."
Also Friday, a senior Pakistani official condemned another presidential hopeful, Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, for saying the best way he could think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. would be to threaten to retaliate by bombing the holiest Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.
Obama said in a speech Wednesday that as president he would order military action against terrorists in Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan if intelligence warranted it. The comment provoked anger in Pakistan, a key ally of the United States in its war on terror.
Many analysts believe that top Taliban and al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are hiding in the region after escaping the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.
President Gen. Pervez Musharraf has come under growing pressure from Washington to do more to tackle the alleged al-Qaida havens in Pakistan. The Bush administration has not ruled out military strikes, but still stresses the importance of cooperating with Pakistan.
"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again," Obama said. "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."
The Associated Press of Pakistan reported Friday that Musharraf was asked at a dinner at Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's house on Thursday about the potential of U.S. military operations in Pakistan. Musharraf told guests that Pakistan was "fully capable" of tackling terrorists in the country and did not need foreign assistance.
Deputy Information Minister Tariq Azim said no foreign forces would be allowed to enter Pakistan, and called Obama irresponsible.
"I think those who make such statements are not aware of our contribution" in the fight on terrorism, he said.
Pakistan used to be a main backer of the Taliban, but it threw its support behind Washington following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Since then, Pakistan has deployed about 90,000 troops in its tribal regions, mostly in lawless North and South Waziristan, and has lost hundreds of troops in fighting with militants there.
But a controversial strategy to make peace with militants and use tribesmen to police Waziristan has fueled U.S. fears that al-Qaida has been given space to regroup.
In Pakistan's national assembly on Friday, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan said he would bring on a debate next week on recent criticism of Pakistan from several quarters in the U.S., including Tancredo's remarks.
It was a matter of "grave concern that U.S. presidential candidates are using unethical and immoral tactics against Islam and Pakistan to win their election," Afghan said. |
Now I ask you, imagine the liberal mainstream media fallout had these words been uttered by Bush or Cheney, or for that matter any of the Republican candidates for President?
Other than that little nagging issue of NUCLEAR WEAPONS, I can't think of a single reason why we shouldn't launch an assault into Pakistan, can you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CheeseSandwich
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How about the fact its a staging area for Al-Qeada and the most likely spot Bin Laden is hiding.
I mean we invaded Afghanistan becuase thats where they were. The Al-Q terrorists were given safe harbor by the taliban, and they are essientially given safe harbor by pakistan. Bush can't even live up to his tired and extremely false NO SAFE HARBOR idea since thats exactly what the tribal lands of pakistan are, a safe harbor for them thar terrorists.
Major republicans have been constantly saying we should attack Iran which is foolish since the majority of fighters are coming from the house of Saud. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Obama's statement negates his criticism of Bush in some ways... Bush used the same excuse to invade Iraq - taking the fight to the "terrorists" and then caused a hornets' nest to emerge... I am not impressed with Obama after this... I hope he will retract this otherwise he definitely will lose support... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
It was a terribly foolish statement. It shows that Obama either puts politics before security or he is not up to the job of being the commander and chief.
All Obama did was weaken Musharraf.
The US ought to hunt Al Qaeda in Pakistan all right but they ought not announce it and then they should deny it whenever they do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo wrote:
| Quote: |
| The US ought to hunt Al Qaeda in Pakistan all right but they ought not announce it and then they should deny it whenever they do it. |
Precisely the tactic that should be used and is, in fact, generally used to enable the leader of the country to avoid confrontation with his political opponents, who would gladly use a public display of power to stir discontent among the people. And in a nation as volatile as Pakistan, that would be counterproductive if not with disastrous consequences.
Pakistan is the linchpin of our strategy to overcome Al-Qaeda but it is foolish to imagine that we would ride roughshod into its western territory at the risk of provoking nuclear retaliation (although Pakistani missiles do not have the range to reach American soil). It certainly would put India on edge, however.
Adventurer:
Glad to hear it and I'm not surprised you're calling him to task as you're one of the very few left-leaning posters on this forum who isn't ideologically bound.
Obama has demonstrated that he speaks with forked tongue. Same as his rival, Clinton, who just yesterday admitted that she received corportate PAC donations and saw nothing wrong with it. But back in 1993 she was heavily critical of PACS which sunk her healthcare reform package. (This is all just more evidence to me that the Democratic leadership is no more ethical than the Republican leadership and suffers from an additional weakness: an inability to grasp the reality of the war on terrorism on the ground. Obama's recommendation serves mainly to demonstrate just how naive he really is about foreign policy. This time maybe he won't get the "affirmative action pass."
To put my cards on the table, I would jump for joy if Colin Powell entered the fray as a viable third-party candidate with either Joe Lieberman as his running mate or John McCain. He'd win the general election to--take that to the bank. But I think his dealings with Rummy and company has soured him on seeking political office--that and his wife's great reluctance to be in the public eye anymore.
If only Lieberman had more charisma, he could get into this thing and he'd have a good shot at winning. I admire him, even before he took a position on the war in Iraq. He's smart, empathetic, and balanced--the kind of moderate the country desperately needs, don't you think?
What say you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like Obama in spite of two related weaknesses: his Idealism; and his very real weakness in foreign affairs. He just fired what looks an awful lot like an impulsive shot from the hip. Not Presidential.
I hope that once in the Oval Office he would relax and become more of a Realist -- as Clinton did very quickly -- and that he would also surround himself with good advisors and listen to them.
Besides that, he remains intelligent and I mostly like what he has to say. It remains between him and Hillary on the left. And I remain hopeful that someone of substance and intelligence will emerge from the right soon.
And Mcgarrett: the W. Bush Administration burned Powell pretty bad over Iraq. I doubt he will return to politics.
Last edited by Gopher on Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
I like Obama in spite of two related weaknesses: his Idealism; and his very real weakness in foreign affairs. He just fired what looks an awful lot like an impulsive shot from the hip. Not Presidential.
I hope that once in the Oval Office he would relax and become more of a Realist, as Clinton did very quickly and that he would also surround himself with good advisors and listen to them.
Besides that, he remains intelligent and I mostly like what he has to say. It remains between him and Hillary on the left. And I remain hopeful that someone of substance and intelligence will emerge from the right soon.
And Mcgarrett: the W. Bush Administration burned Powell pretty bad over Iraq. I doubt he will return to politics. |
Obama, can make mistakes. I think this is the second major gaffe from his campaign. There was something about Hillary Clinton and money from Indians. I can't remember the details, but he has to watch he says. But he is definitely very intelligent and can learn quickly. However, what he said was really irresponsible considering the pressure Musharraf, an ally, is under in Pakistan. You don't want to undermine allies and you can't be criticizing Bush for an invasion of Iraq when promoting a careless invasion of Pakistan. It seems contradictory. There is nothing to get cooperation from Pakistan and to go in and another to bomb Pakistan's tribal areas.
Steve, Bill Clinton was Left-leaning, but he believed in being pragmatic.
Most people are not extreme in the U.S. with some exceptions...there are moderates on both sides, so why throw baby out with the bath water.
I felt Bush helped divide people though he spoke of bi-partisanship.
People need someone to try to bring people together and clean house...
As far as the democrats and republicans, they are both corrupt.
I prefer a change in the constitution where there can be more independence for Congressmen while having a way to have a vote of no confidence instead of impeachment so new elections can be held when a leader really has hit rock bottom. The Iraq War seems like Bush's war when America has a lot at stake. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this is a case of "reaction" and managing on the part of Obama's handlers. It will be a pity if they start stage managing the guy so he will get his share of x,y and z's votes.
After the debate and everyone coming down on him as "friendly" and a dictator lover, we've witnessed a message of "strength" and fightem from him. No doubt, pushed to be said by his managers, so to not lose one segment of the voting public. It is this micromanaging which is one thing (along with vested interest/lobby and the military / religion embeding) that has rotted out politics and lent it little integrity. What appears is pure bland, monoculture/thought.
Pity. Nobody speaks their mind any more in politics. They only speak platitudes and sound bites. Mere tape recorders.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| I like Obama in spite of two related weaknesses: his Idealism; and his very real weakness in foreign affairs...Not Presidential. |
I voiced these reservations earlier. McCain seems to have followed up nicely.
| CNN Reports wrote: |
WASHINGTON(CNN) � In a statement echoing the recent foreign policy quarrel between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, Republican Senator and presidential hopeful John McCain accused Obama of "naivete" in a newspaper interview posted online Sunday.
McCain made the comments to The State newspaper in Columbia, South Carolina.
The Arizona Senator was asked about Obama�s speech last week in which he said he would possibly send U.S. troops into Pakistan to pursue terrorists, even without the approval of the Pakistani government.
"It�s kind of typical of his naivete," McCain told the newspaper. "If we go in, and maybe we should depending on the assessment, we would want to do it covertly and we would want to do it in coordination with Pakistanis covertly as well. It wouldn�t be the smartest thing to do to announce to the world we�re attacking another country." |
Strange. For about a year now, every time I read something on McCain that quotes the man, I hear Battlestar Gallactica's "Colonel Tigh" talking... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| McCain would be the best president of all the candidates. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It makes as much sense as staying out of Cambodia and Laos during Vietnam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
just another day
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Location: Living with the Alaskan Inuits!!
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| obama is just trying to keep the neo-cons in their seats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I may jump parties and vote Obama in the primaries just to keep Hillary out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| McCain would be the best president of all the candidates. |
IMO, this statement definitely "certifies" you...
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Pity. Nobody speaks their mind any more in politics. They only speak platitudes and sound bites. Mere tape recorders.
|
Let me introduce you to Dr. Ron Paul.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=3958 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
