Obama’s Threat to Attack Pakistan Raises Red Flags in Germany

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Is Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Barack Obama, the self-declared "new face" of American politics, nothing but a unilateralist, trigger happy, national security hard-liner--the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing? That’s probably the reaction that German political observers (as well as other Europeans for that matter) had when learning about the details of Senator Obama’s "comprehensive strategy to fight global terrorism, which he rolled out in a speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington last Tuesday.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/08/obamas_threat_to_attack_pakist.asp

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Well now there is a fella ready for the office. :thumbs: :laugh: :BangHead:

 

[pinoybaptist]

Rudy Giuliani says about Obama's "strategy":

Sit down and talk with the enemies, bomb our allies.

I think it's all hot air.

 

[KenH]

Senator Obama did not say anything about attacking or bombing or invading Pakistan. He said that he would send our forces to attack al Qaeda. He said:

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will."

I totally agree with Senator Obama's position to attack al Qaeda when the opportunity arises. Does anyone disagree?

I would have more confidence in a President Obama leading the U.S. war against al Qaeda than I do in the current bumbler we have in the Oval Office.

 

[JFox1]

Sounds like he wants to invade Pakistan. We don't need another war. We still have that big mess in Iraq. :BangHead:

 

[canadyjd]

Senator Obama did not say anything about attacking or bombing Pakistan. He said that he would send our forces to attack al Qaeda. He said:

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will."

I totally agree with Senator Obama's position to attack al Qaeda when the opportunity arises. Does anyone disagree?
I would have more confidence in a President Obama leading the U.S. war against al Qaeda than I do in the current bumbler we have in the Oval Office.

But the "actionable intelligence" must always be suspect since we "know" the current administration just made everything up concerning terrorist intelligence, right?

peace to youraying:

 

[KenH]

But the "actionable intelligence" must always be suspect since we "know" the current administration just made everything up concerning terrorist intelligence, right?

As I stated, I would have more confidence in an Obama administration in this matter than the current administration that couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[canadyjd]

As I stated, I would have more confidence in an Obama administration in this matter than the current administration that couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag.

And I do not. So there. My vote just cancelled out your vote.:wavey:

peace to youraying:

 

[KenH]

What vote? I won't be voting for Senator Obama or whomever wins the Democratic presidential nomination or the Republican presidential nomination. I'll be voting for the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in November 2008.

 

[canadyjd]

What vote? I won't be voting for Senator Obama or whomever wins the Democratic presidential nomination or the Republican presidential nomination. I'll be voting for the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in November 2008.

And "waste" your vote on a third party candidate?:smilewinkgrin:

peace to youraying:

 

[KenH]

Yep. I'll let the Demopublicans take care of their own intramural election battle in November 2008.

 

[pinoybaptist]

The reason I think it's all hot air is because we need to remember we can't just tell Firebase Anaconda, for example, to up and go inside Pakistan and find the danged OBL.

Pakistan is a sovereign country, duly recognized as such by many nations, also, it is allied to us, and I don't think it will make any difference to its president whether it was Bush or Barack talking to him about going into his country after OBL, his answer will still be "no, we will take care of it", and it doesn't mean he really will.

He's got his own political butt to cover.

But, hey, if somebody can pull it off, more power to him.

 

[canadyjd]

Yep. I'll let the Demopublicans take care of their own intramural election battle in November 2008.

I thought they were the Republocrats?:laugh:

peace to youraying:

 

[KenH]

The Allies during World War II didn't get permission of the various countries before we attacked the Nazis in their countries.

 

[KenH]

I thought they were the Republocrats?

Demopublicans. Republicrats. The same brood.

 

[canadyjd]

The Allies during World War II didn't get permission of the various countries before we attacked the Nazis in their countries.

I think the Nazis had already taken complete control of those countries, didn't they?

peace to youraying:

 

[KenH]

The Nazis were scattered all over the place in Europe and North Africa.

If our military has a chance to attack the organization that attacked these United States on September 11, 2001, then I say that we attack them. We don't have to ask permission from another country to defend ourselves.

Al Qaeda is currently the strongest it has been after we invaded Afghanistan and the Bush administration failed to finish it off when it had the oppportunity in late 2001-early 2002. The alternative to what Senator Obama is proposing is to do nothing and to allow al Qaeda to grow even stronger in its new nesting grounds in western Pakistan.

I reject that alternative. I totally reject the idea that we have to sit around and do nothing and simply allow al Qaeda to hit these United States again because we don't want to offend the leaders of Pakistan if they won't order the job done.

 

[Ex-Fundy]

My true feelings about the guy

:tonofbricks:

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Yup. Ain't Rush Limbaugh hilarious ? I'm glad you like him.

 

[Ex-Fundy]

Yup. Ain't Rush Limbaugh hilarious ? I'm glad you like him.

I don't, I think he's a asinine jerk. Kinda like you.

But the piece was hilarious.