Most of us are aware at this point most Republicans can’t tell the difference between encouragng the spread of democracy and spreading death and destruction, but McCain obviously can’t tell the difference between taking a strong stand and over reacting. A Pundit Not a President
The big concern with a McCain presidency – a concern which I am surprised has not been vocalized more fully – is that the U.S. will lurch from crisis to crisis, confrontation to confrontation, whether it be with Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc. The danger is that McCain’s pundit-like rhetoric will entrap the U.S. in descending spiral of foreign policy brinksmanship. Just think about the very likely scenario of McCain giving Iran/Russia a rhetorical ultimatum and Iran/Russia ignoring it. Now we are stuck – either we lose face by not following through on our threats or we follow through and go to war. We can’t afford such a reckless approach after the last eight years. For the next eight we need a president not a pundit.
Obama campaign has also noticed a pattern to McCain’s blusterous over the top outbursts, Obama Campaign: McCain Is A Reckless Hothead
On a conference call with reporters just now, senior Obama foreign policy adviser Susan Rice argued that there is “a pattern here of recklessness” when it comes to McCain’s approach to various national security issues. She pointed out that McCain reacted too quickly with “aggressive and bellicose” rhetoric on the Russia-Georgia crisis, and contrasted that with Obama’s measured response to the dust-up.
“There’s something to be said for letting facts drive judgment,” Rice said, also referring to McCain’s desire to target Iraq right after 9/11.
Maybe what Johnny really means when he makes the patently ridiculous claim that he knows how to “win wars” is that he knows how to start them, but not how to stop them.
I’m one of those liberals that thinks a couple years of public service after high school is a great idea. Either in the military or something like the Freedom Corps. McCain doesn’t think it should be voluntary according to these remarks, John McCain Agrees: “If we don’t reenact the draft I don’t think we will have anyone to chase Bin Laden” If he plans on invading Russia and Iran among others, he will need some people to do the fighting while he’s vacationing in one of the family’s eight mansions. McCain isn’t sure how many homes he and his wife own – I’m continually impressed by how in touch Cons are with the average American.
About those overseas donors. Obama to see money gets returned. Mccain not so much, US OVERSEAS DONORS
John McCain’s campaign says it’s impractical to follow all the government’s instructions for keeping prohibited foreign money out of the U.S. election.
Let’s do the math. Invading’countries at the slightest provocation must somehow be pratical to McCain. Keeping track of money on the other hand, he can’t be bothered with. Experience is supposed to lead one to have a more prudent cautious world view. If McCain’s experience is what forms this take on wars and money it doesn’t reflect all that well on experience as a virtue. At least not in McCain’s case.
Except for those pink bunny slipper wearing chicken-hawks we’re all glad to hear serious withdrawl/redeploymeny talk about Iraq IRAQ WITHDRAWAL THOUGHTS.
This is very good news for Democrats. It means that our eventual withdrawal from Iraq will not only be a bipartisan action, it will have been the creation of a Republican president. This is going to make it almost impossible for conservatives to ramp up any kind of serious stab-in-the-back narrative against anti-war liberals.
Basic Obama spin: “I’m glad to see that President Bush has finally come around to my view etc. etc.” This ought to be a big win for him: he visits Iraq, meets with Nouri al-Maliki, gets Maliki’s endorsement for a near-term troop withdrawal, and then gets to applaud as President Bush signs on.
All sounds good, but the fragile semi-peace that Iraq has now could come apart if some political issues within Iraq are not resolved, Key U.S. Iraq strategy in danger of collapse
A key pillar of the U.S. strategy to pacify Iraq is in danger of collapsing because the Iraqi government is failing to absorb tens of thousands of former Sunni Muslim insurgents who’d joined U.S.-allied militia groups into the country’s security forces.
[ ]…The conflict over the militias underscores how little has changed in Iraq in the past year despite the drop in violence, which American politicians often attribute to the temporary increase of U.S. troops in Iraq that ended in July.
American military officials here have always said that the creation of the Sunni militias was at least as important to the precipitous drop in violence as the presence of 30,000 more U.S. troops, and that incorporating them into the security forces would go a long way toward bringing about the sort of reconciliation needed for long-term stability.
The majority Shiia government doesn’t trust them. Since its difficult to even get Secretary of State Rice to shorten her vacation to talk to the Russians this administration and hothead McSame don’t exactly inspire confidence in their ability to deal with political crisis. if you want to create a political crisis then the neocons are definitely the go to people.