Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama Vs. Osama (New York Post article)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Obama Vs. Osama (New York Post article)

    OBAMA VS. OSAMA
    PROMISES AREN'T PLANS, BARACK
    Obama: Stunningly naive when talking about national security.

    June 19, 2008 -- NAME-BRAND journalists have let Barack Obama make any claim he chooses about Iraq, Afghanistan or coping with terrorism without pinning him down for details.

    Yet many of his comments and positions seem stunningly naive about national security. Given that this man may become our next president, shouldn't he explain how he'd do the many impressive things he's promised?

    This week, Obama claimed, again, that he'd promptly capture Osama bin Laden. OK, tell me how: Specifically, which concrete measures would he take that haven't been taken? How would he force our intelligence agencies to locate bin Laden? And he can't just respond, "That's classified."

    He also claimed that fighting terrorism is a law-enforcement problem, not a military one (should we send the NYPD to Mosul and Kandahar?), and that the answer to terrorism is the approach taken after the 1993 World Trade Center attack, featuring conventional trials and prison terms.

    That flaccid post-'93 response only encouraged terrorists - who are unfazed by the prospect of a US prison, where the quality of life's better than it was at home. The Clinton administration's hesitancy and softness gave us the subsequent attacks on the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia, on our embassies in East Africa, on the USS Cole and, ultimately, the events of 9/11.

    The senator needs to tell us why it would be different now.

    Obama has also said he'd send our troops into Pakistan, although he'll withdraw rapidly from Iraq. His unwillingness to discuss the consequences of a hasty retreat from Baghdad is one thing - but invading Pakistan would be an order of magnitude worse.

    A substantial number of Iraq's 26 million citizens did welcome us. In Pakistan, with its 170 million Muslims and some of the most rugged terrain on earth, anti-Americanism prevails. Any US military incursion would be greeted with outrage and demands for a military response.

    Nor does Obama appear to grasp that armies need fuel, ammunition, food, spare parts and other supplies. Nearly everything for our troops in landlocked Afghanistan, from bottled water to medical supplies, now comes via Pakistani ports, roads and railroads. If those long, difficult routes were cut, how would President Obama supply our troops? And no, it can't all be done by air.

    Oh, Pakistan has nukes, too.

    Also this week, Obama's advisers stated that, if apprehended, Osama bin Laden should be tried in a conventional US courtroom. My fellow Americans, do you believe that?

    Do you believe that this arch-terrorist, publicly proud of his responsibility for 9/11, should be given all the rights of a US citizen and a public platform to engage in propaganda?

    What the full-rights-for-terrorists advocates fail to comprehend is that our judicial processes - so dear to us - are viewed by terrorists as a means to advance their cause, to embarrass us, to reveal our intelligence methods and to perpetuate their martyr myth.

    Harsh as it may sound, a dead terrorist is dead, but an imprisoned terrorist is a cause (and not just for his fellow radicals). Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is forgotten, but our Guantanamo prisoners are pop stars.

    Obama appears out of his depth on all this, but the gushingly friendly media have given him a pass on every groundless claim or gaffe. It's time for journalists to start asking him tough questions - to press him when he doesn't give serious answers. Isn't that their job?

    Those who knew Obama in his university days claim that he couldn't be persuaded to study history. It shows. And his lifelong lack of interest in the military is self-evident.

    The response that "he has knowledgeable advisers" isn't enough. Obama's military and counterterror "experts" compose a unique collection of the dismissed, the discredited and the dysfunctional. Most appear to be out to settle personal grudges rather than to advance our nation's security.

    Let's hope that just one high-profile journalist pushes Obama on the following questions:

    * How would you find Osama bin Laden? What, specifically, would you do differently?

    * What would be the rules for capturing or killing Osama?

    * How would you manage the consequences of the military incursion into Pakistan you've threatened? Are you willing to go to war with Pakistan?

    * What would be the specific results of a swift troop withdrawal from Iraq?

    * Why would a judicial approach to defeating terrorists work this time when it failed to protect us in the past?

    * Do you truly believe that self-admitted terrorists, when captured, deserve the full legal privileges of US citizens?

    If this highly talented candidate has glaring gaps in his understanding of the world, voters deserve to know. If his campaign promises have no substance, we deserve to know that, too.

    I support John McCain for president, but I live by the values that guided me as an Army officer: I will support my commander in chief as chosen by the American people, no matter who he (or, one day, she) may be. But until the people make their choice, both candidates should be held to the same tough standards of truth in advertising.

    Sen. Obama, tell us how.

    Ralph Peters' new book, "Looking for Trouble," will be published in July.
    Also this week, Obama's advisers stated that, if apprehended, Osama bin Laden should be tried in a conventional US courtroom. My fellow Americans, do you believe that?

    Do you believe that this arch-terrorist, publicly proud of his responsibility for 9/11, should be given all the rights of a US citizen and a public platform to engage in propaganda?
    The above (among other things) is just......

  • #2
    Sen. Obama, tell us how
    That's the $64,000 question right there...and it's unanswerable.

    Let's hope it doesn't take a four year term to realize that.
    “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

    Comment


    • #3
      Also this week, Obama's advisers stated that, if apprehended, Osama bin Laden should be tried in a conventional US courtroom. My fellow Americans, do you believe that?

      Do you believe that this arch-terrorist, publicly proud of his responsibility for 9/11, should be given all the rights of a US citizen and a public platform to engage in propaganda?
      Possibly.

      But of course, I'm assuming the case presented would be air tight.

      Propaganda works two ways you know.

      Comment


      • #4
        He also claimed that fighting terrorism is a law-enforcement problem, not a military one (should we send the NYPD to Mosul and Kandahar?).
        I stopped reading here.

        This reporter is an idiot.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by King Six View Post
          I stopped reading here.

          This reporter is an idiot.
          Are you saying this reporter is an idiot by saying Obama believes fighting terrorism is a law enforcement matter?

          -or-

          Are you saying Obama is an idiot by saying fighting terrorism is a law enforcement matter?



          On a related note, I think the GOP/conservatives should come out and explain to the American people that Bush isn't using ONLY military measures to fight the terrorists. He's using military IN ADDITION TO law enforcement measures that all liberals want to use.

          I just think the Bush administration is horrible at communicating this multi-pronged concept to the people.
          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

          Comment


          • #6
            God help us if the Myspace generation elects Obama as president. I am fearing the worst, in that case. The man is simply riding a wave of meda attention and public adoration for the virtues of qualities that the TRL kids can relate to - fist bumps, basketball, and MTV. It will be a sad day in our history, if he becomes CIC.

            Comment


            • #7
              walking dead,

              if obama simply had the myspace generation, mccain would be laughing all the way to victory. no, obama's main appeal is that he seems to be everything bush is not: an engaging, inclusive message, a semi-populist economic stance, youthful, diplomatic. that strikes a powerful chord with many americans.

              of course that is not to state that he will be a good president- it just means he's an excellent candidate. somewhat akin to bush in 2000, ironically.
              Last edited by astralis; 26 Jun 08,, 03:10.
              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

              Comment


              • #8
                gunnut,

                On a related note, I think the GOP/conservatives should come out and explain to the American people that Bush isn't using ONLY military measures to fight the terrorists. He's using military IN ADDITION TO law enforcement measures that all liberals want to use.

                I just think the Bush administration is horrible at communicating this multi-pronged concept to the people.
                on this issue bush will forever be tarred by his first administration, where military force indeed was seen and used as the prime driver in international relations. after all, in the aftermath of 9-11, anything that smacked of negotiation or diplomacy had a distinct twinge of weakness (something that lasts even up to this very day).

                in any case, that view fit quite nicely with the foreign policy beliefs of the neo-conservatives; after all, they viewed iraq not so much as an opportunity to get rid of nukes but as a stepping-stone to their grand vision of the middle east, where the US Army would easily topple and replace tyrants. if you remember may 2003, the cry in their circles then was "to turn the US army right to Tehran, and then left to Damascus."

                it wasn't until this administration that bush began to emphasize diplomacy.
                There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                Comment


                • #9
                  walking dead,

                  if obama simply had the myspace generation, mccain would be laughing all the way to victory.
                  I should have been more clear - he engaged the myspace generation, and others, who previously had no interest to vote. I am not blaming his campaign for using media outlets effectively but, I beleve this helped him catch those voters who sat out the last election. After all, we have a huge population of young adults, and twenty-somethings who see him as this younger progressive guy much like themselves. In that sense I agree with you 100%. I am not discounting middle-class folks, ultra-liberals, and the other kind who he is appealing to - I am just emphasizing the massive MONEY and INFORMATION DISPERSION effect that "myspacers" bring to the table. After all, they are the main consumers of the web.

                  no, obama's main appeal is that he seems to be everything bush is not: an engaging,
                  Not necessarily the criteria crucial for rational voters.

                  inclusive message
                  That'll bring 'em to the polls. Everyone wants to fill included.

                  a semi-populist economic stance, youthful, diplomatic. that strikes a powerful chord with many americans.
                  Seems like an emphasis on personal appearance and appeal.

                  of course that is not to state that he will be a good president- it just means he's an excellent candidate. somewhat akin to bush in 2000, ironically.
                  I am not arguing with you. In fact, I agree here. This is why I am worried about this election - I believe he will rally so many people and money against McCain that it would be impossible to compete - due to what we have discussed. I just wish we used a different criteria to judge a potential commander-in-chief. He is like a rockstar running for president. With so little experience in the Senate, he pretty much rode the wave of popularity - I mean he knew that he would run on the rockstar platform from the moment he decided to announce candidacy. Simply gauged his popularity and decided it was time. Sad, really. If he gets elected, it was because he campaigned well, not much else.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by astralis View Post
                    it wasn't until this administration that bush began to emphasize diplomacy.
                    Except for all the diplomacy used to garner support for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, support in Indonesia, permission to store and interrogate sensitive suspects in foreign countries, keep Mushy on the potty in Pakistan and India friendly, pressure Israel to let the Palestinians walk all over them, and all the rest of it. Other than that, sure, it was absolutely no talky for 4 years.

                    -dale

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dalem View Post
                      Except for all the diplomacy used to garner support for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, support in Indonesia, permission to store and interrogate sensitive suspects in foreign countries, keep Mushy on the potty in Pakistan and India friendly, pressure Israel to let the Palestinians walk all over them, and all the rest of it. Other than that, sure, it was absolutely no talky for 4 years.

                      -dale
                      You forgot pressuring the Chinese to be good world citizens by taking responsibility for NK
                      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                      Leibniz

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        dalem,

                        Except for all the diplomacy used to garner support for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, support in Indonesia, permission to store and interrogate sensitive suspects in foreign countries, keep Mushy on the potty in Pakistan and India friendly, pressure Israel to let the Palestinians walk all over them, and all the rest of it. Other than that, sure, it was absolutely no talky for 4 years.

                        -dale
                        i'm not saying there was no diplomacy- just that it was not emphasized. the most direct proof of this is simply that in the white house internecine wars, powell almost always came off second-best versus rumsfeld.

                        you can trace the shift. by the beginning of the second administration, rice began to get her way vis-a-vis rumsfeld more often; now, in a complete 180 from years past, rice and gates often collaborate.
                        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          pari,

                          You forgot pressuring the Chinese to be good world citizens by taking responsibility for NK
                          yup...and when was this policy instituted? if you remember the first administration, focus was on regime change and waiting for kim to collapse. when that didn't work...
                          There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by astralis View Post
                            dalem,

                            i'm not saying there was no diplomacy- just that it was not emphasized.
                            I disagree.

                            -dale

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by King Six View Post
                              I stopped reading here.

                              This reporter is an idiot.
                              How can you say the reporter is an idiot? Would you like for us to tell the LAPD and NYPD to drop what they are doing, and go overseas to fight terrorism and find Osama while they are at it? The Departments have much to do in the states, fighting terrorism is a joint effort between all of the departments, IE - DOD, CIA, Police Departments, etc. To say "fighting terrorism is a law-enforcement problem, not a military one" shows how inexperienced the man really is. The more he speaks, the more he shows his lack of knowledge about many things that are important if you want to be CIC. I am in no way saying McCain is perfect. McCain would, based off of researching both the candidates, be a much better President.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X