McCain vs. Obama Re: al Qaeda In Iraq
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
February 27, 2008 8:18pm CST
Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama have engaged in a heated exchange today over al Qaeda in Iraq. It started with McCain comments about Obama's answer to a question in last night's debate in Ohio when Obama was asked "if the president would have to right to go back into Iraq in order to suppress an insurrection after downsizing the U.S. troop presence."
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/27/mccain.obama.iraq/index.html
Here is what Obama answered - "I always reserve the right for the president ... to make sure that we are looking out for American interests, and if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."
Although McCain later said he hadn't watched the debate, his press office sent out the following statement today; McCain asked, "Is Sen. Obama unaware that al Qaeda is still present in Iraq, that our forces are successfully fighting them every day, and that his Iraq policy of withdrawal would embolden al Qaeda and weaken our security?"
In his response Obama said the question he was asked during the debate was a "big hypothetical", saying "I said, 'Well, I would always reserve the right to go in and strike against al Qaeda if they were in Iraq,' so you know, this is how politics works. McCain thought that he could make a clever point by saying ,'Well let me give you some news Barack, al Qaeda is in Iraq,' like I wasn't reading the papers, like I didn't know what was going on. I said, 'Well first of all, I do know that al Qaeda is in Iraq. That's why I've said we should continue to strike al Qaeda targets. But I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq. John McCain may like to say he wants to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but so far all he's done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq."
McCain in his statement said "the Democratic presidential contenders deny progress and see only gloom and doom. Where is the audacity of hope when it comes to backing the success of our troops all the way to victory in Iraq? What we heard last night was the timidity of despair."
So, can we discuss/debate/argue(respectfully) who's right and who's wrong here without name calling and insults?
Annie
4 people like this
5 responses
@pismeof (855)
• United States
28 Feb 08
As far as I am concerned the number #1 responsibility of the president is defense of the country and her people.All other issues such as economy or health care or what ever you choose is secondary.
For those of you who are so admired by OBAMA ,Do you honestly think he's got the
ability or experience to do so?Think about that as you all go to the polls in November.
@jormins (1223)
• United States
28 Feb 08
So we are in Iraq to defend America? You do realize that Al Qaeda is probably loving the fact that are economy is doing terrible because we are so worried about Al Qaeda and WMD's that don't even exist. Defending the country doesn't always mean invading other countries.
Obama might not be as old as McCain but as far as I'm concerned he's made better decisions when it comes to Iraq. Obama was against the war when it wasn't popular, back when we thought Bush wasn't full of it.
I,like most of America, am very tired of Bush and McCain is slowly morphing into him, so it'll be an easy vote for Obama or even Hillary if I have to.
2 people like this
@lolalolacherrycola (899)
• United States
29 Feb 08
Personally, I don't see Obama as having the experience nor a full grasp of foreign affairs and don't know if he could make the right decisions.
I don't like any of the candidates up for election and find it scary. Not even sure who to vote for as I don't really care for or align myself with any of them on all the important issues.
Should be an interesting election.
@jormins (1223)
• United States
28 Feb 08
I think the funniest thing is that Obama was answering a hypothetical question raised by Tim Russert. For some reason he went pretty heavy into hypothetical situations to test the Dem's. Russert asked after we leave Iraq what if Al Qaeda returns to Iraq, it had nothing to do with the present in that question.
I still think McCain is going to be employing a less clean campaign than he says he will be. Even though he has disavowed the crazy comments his surrogate (or former surrogate as that nut has now endorsed Hillary Clinton) made in Ohio, there's no way his campaign didn't know how loopy that guy is.
3 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
28 Feb 08
I'm going to do another post on this topic as McCain first claimed he'd never met this Cunningham loser and didn't know how he'd ended up being at this rally; then Cunningham said he'd met McCain twice and that he'd been hired to "toss red meat" to the crowd at the rally. Hmmmmm...
Annie
3 people like this
@jormins (1223)
• United States
28 Feb 08
I'll have to keep an eye out for it tomorrow. I'm thinking about putting together an article (in another online community) showing everyone where McCain has strayed. I think its key for the independent voters to see this is not the same McCain that we are used to. He's sold out for his chance at getting into that oval office.
3 people like this
@RebeccaLynn (2256)
• United States
28 Feb 08
Honestly, I'm tired of the potshots and lowball politics.
This was a stupid arguement. Here is what I think, though I have to admit, I seem to be in the minority.
One - We should never have gone to Iraq. The reasons we went in the first place are A) Pay back. Saddam tried to assinate Bush Sr. when he was in office. Jr. wanted revenge. B) Oil. Plain and simple.
Two - If any of our government officials truly gave a flip about 9/11, we would have gone full force into Afghanistan and flushed out Osama. Because we went on a revenge mission, we missed the truly dangerous man.
Everyone likes what Obama has to say. He's making a lot of promises but I still have never heard him explain how he plans to implement his promises. I want to hear the plan. Not just the promises.
I don't like Hillary's politics. So no vote from me there.
McCain is a mini-Bush, so no vote there either.
If Obama would clarify his plan I might lean that way, otherwise, I don't like any of them.
BUT - now that we are in Iraq (whether we want to be or not) we need to stay until the job is done. Life is not like a box of chocolates. It's like a jar of jalepenos. What you do today could burn your as* tomorrow.
If we pull out too soon, we are inviting trouble. We made the mess. Now we need to clean it up.
@lolalolacherrycola (899)
• United States
29 Feb 08
I totally agree with you about making tons on promises with no plan.
Why doesn't someone nail him down as to what his plan is to implement all these changes?
All these debates and yet still no one can get a straight answer out of these politicians.
It is all such a farce in my eyes.
They can all talk the talk, but will they walk the walk?
1 person likes this
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
28 Feb 08
McCain is right... Obama has already said he is pulling the troops out of Iraq. Then he turns around and says that if they build a base we will go back in again.
That is when McCain wanted to know if Obama was aware that Al-qaeda was already there.
Obama says he was against the war in Iraq, yet he has also said that we should invade Pakistan in order to get bin Laden.
That means that he favors violating the sovereignty of one of our allies against Pakistan's wishes.
In exactly what way does that demonstrate that Obama possesses an astute understanding of foreign policy?... yet he rails against Bush and Hillary both for Iraq... which is something that was approved by Congress.
As far as the war in Iraq goes, in Obama's opinion it may have been misguided, yet it was the will of the people and of Congress that sent us there.
By the way, there has been good progress in Iraq... and Bush is drawing down the troops in a manner that he thinks is wise.
Although finishing up in Iraq would be good, it would be best to do it in a way that would ensure that we don't have to return and do it all over again, which was the point that McCain was making.
2 people like this
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
29 Feb 08
Actually, the reason that al-Qaeda was not present in Iraq before we got there, if that is even true, was because Saddam had total control of Iraq... anyone who opposed him was killed.
That was not only true of the Kurds, it was true of his own family members as well.
The reason that they would stay after we leave is so that they could maintain a presence and continue training, just as they are doing in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well.
The civil war bit is getting pretty old and has been pretty much discounted after the mainstream media finally acknowledged that the so-called insurgents were actually terrorists, which had been said all along.
There were many factors for going into Iraq, not the least of which was the enforcement of the ceasefire that Saddam had repeatedly broken, the WMD's, and the war on terror.
You claim the people who voted for going into Iraq were lied to and misled... that is a lie.
Hillary herself claimed to have separate and independent data showing that Saddam had the WMD's and that is why she voted for the war.
Of course she tells a different story now. I recently posted a discussion that had quotes of many of the same people who now claim they were misled... these quotes were acknowledging the WMD's, and a lot of them were from 1998... so who were they "misled" by?
Then there was the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 that was signed by Bill Clinton that made the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam official US policy... and this was done for the sole purpose of destroying Iraq's capability of producing and using WMD's, which Saddam had already done on several occasions against the Kurds.
About Pakistan, not only did Obama make that statement... John Edwards made the same statement as well. You can try to claim it was out of context if you want, but I have seen the statement... Words have meaning, and if he didn't mean what he said then he has no business in politics, let alone the presidency.
The bottom line is that Obama was asked a question and he gave an answer that made him look naive and out of touch.
bin Laden has been hiding out in Pakistan, so are you now saying that we should invade Pakistan to search for him as both Edwards and Obama have suggested?
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
29 Feb 08
First of all, why would al Qaeda stay in Iraq once we're gone? They weren't there before us so why would they hang around once we're gone? A civil war in Iraq is another story - they've been fighting for thousands of years over religion why should we think they'll stop now? Obama's plans to invade Pakistan were taken completely out of context, but I know there's no use getting in that argument. The "people " who believed in invading Iraq when we did believed in it because they were lied to and mislead. We should have kept our attention on Afghanistan and going after Bin Laden but Bush said long ago he rarely thinks about him anymore! Any progress that has been made in Iraq since the "surge" should have happened many years and lives ago so I have no faith in Bush doing anything that is wise. Also, any "drawing down" of the troops is nothing more than the rotations that had been planned before the surge, so in other words there is no draw down. The bottom line is Obama was asked a hypothetical question and he gave a hypothetical answer.
Annie
1 person likes this
@soccermom (3198)
• United States
28 Feb 08
What I think is funny is that McCain is acting like he's already running against Obama when the Democratic nominee hasn't even been decided yet! Although I support Obama, Hillary is still in the race.
I think it's funny how McCain started his "I have news" spiel...does he think the war is popular? Looking back does he think he made the right decision when giving Bush the authority to invade? Did he think that vote wouldn't get thrown in his face? This election year is going to be nuts.
2 people like this
