McCain Smacks Obama For "Inexperience And Reckless Judgment"
John McCain's staffers might be mired in lobbyist questions, but looking to shift course, they're spinning a different line today, and it involves a stern smackdown of their likely Dem rival for saying he would engage diplomatically with rogue nations, most prominently Iran.
Reporting from Chicago, NBC/NJ's Carrie Dann notes that before addressing the National Restaurant Association, McCain offered these stern words about Barack Obama's foreign policy:
"Senator Obama has declared, and repeatedly reaffirmed his intention to meet the President of Iran without any preconditions, likening it to meetings between former American Presidents and the leaders of the Soviet Union. Such a statement betrays the depth of Senator Obama's inexperience and reckless judgment. These are very serious deficiencies for an American president to possess."
McCain's full Obama/Iran rant is available after the jump.
John McCain in Chicago today:
"Before I begin my remarks, I want to respond briefly to a comment Senator Obama made yesterday about the threat posed to the United States by the government of Iran. Senator Obama claimed that the threat Iran poses to our security is tiny compared to the threat once posed by the former Soviet Union. Obviously, Iran isn't a superpower, doesn't possess the military power the Soviet Union had. But that does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination that the threat posed by Iran is insignificant. On the contrary, right now Iran provides some of the deadliest explosive devices used in Iraq to kill our soldiers. They are the chief sponsor of Shia extremists in Iraq, and terrorist organizations in the Middle East. And their President, who has called Israel a stinking corpse, has repeatedly made clear his government's commitment, commitment, to Israel's destruction. Most worrying, Iran is intent on acquiring nuclear weapons. The biggest national security challenge the United States currently faces is keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists. Should Iran acquire nuclear weapons, that danger would become very dire, indeed. They might not become a superpower, but the threat the Government of Iran poses is anything but tiny.
"Senator Obama has, Senator Obama has declared, and repeatedly reaffirmed his intention to meet the President of Iran without any preconditions, likening it to meetings between former American Presidents and the leaders of the Soviet Union. Such a statement betrays the depth of Senator Obama's inexperience and reckless judgment. These are very serious deficiencies for an American president to possess. An ill conceived meeting between the President of the United States and the President of Iran, and the massive world media coverage it would attract, would increase the prestige of an implacable foe of the United States, and reinforce his confidence that Iran's dedication to acquiring nuclear weapons, supporting terrorists and destroying the State of Israel had succeeded in winning concessions from the most powerful nation on earth. And he's unli- unlikely to abandon the dangerous ambitions that will have given him a prominent role on the world stage.
"This is not to suggest that the United States should not communicate with Iran our concerns about their behavior. Those communications have already occurred at an appropriate level, which the Iranians recently suspended. But a summit meeting with the President of the United States, which is what Senator Obama proposes, is the most prestigious card we have to play in international diplomacy. It is not a card to be played lightly. Summit meetings must be much more than personal get-acquainted sessions. They must be designed to advance American interest. An unconditional summit meeting with the next American president would confer both international legitimacy on the Iranian president and could strengthen him domestically when he is very unpopular among the Iranian people. It is likely such a meeting would not only fail to persuade him to abandon Iran's nuclear weapons, its support of terrorists and commitment to Israel's extinction, it could very well convince him that those policies are succeeding in strengthening his hold on power, and embolden him to continue his very dangerous behavior. The next President ought to understand such basic realities of international relations."
Hahaha. "Reckless judgement". How many TRILLIONS of dollars will Iraq cost us?
McCain has balls bringing up Iran. His support of George W. Bush's 'worst foreign policy decision ever' has emboldened them and allowed them to attack our military and allowed radical Shiia to take over Iraq... GOOD JUDGMENT THERE!
Our brave troops who give their all for the Commander-in-Chief's judgment are put at risk by being in Iraq.
What could possibly be more reckless than that?
The middle east has clearly been inflamed since we have occupied Iraq.
What could possibly be more reckless than that?
Hamas -- a terrorist group that kills civilians in Israel -- has won political victories because of our presence in Iraq.
What could possibly be more reckless than that?
While Osama Bin Laden is free to make tapes for youtube. And the Taliban are resurgent.
What could possibly be more reckless than that?
McCain supports the worst President in history every step of the way.
What could possibly be more reckless than that?
Republican Wizards (as in Oz --illusionary figures behind a curtain of Deceit!) The Republican Magicians are at it again -- all smoke & mirrors and huff and puff. We are tired of thier trickeries based on illusions and not fact, and like the Wizard in Oz, they have been exposed as fakers, loud, scary voice with no Real Power. This massed negativity has been a real detriment to American economic progress and peace in Iraq. Such people are like a millstone around the neck of humanity, crippling true effort, murmuring Family Values, yet do nothing but impede true progress while humanity is dying.
They cry out in unison: I'll huff and puff and blow your house down if you disagree with me, say the Big, Bad Wolves in hopes of inciting fear and getting the opposing party to back down! Only this time, we will not be fooled again by these "fakers" and our House will withstand the onslaught of this False, Fleeting Wind that has devasted the American way of life no more!
Even if my politics were all about sabre rattling, fear politics and the military.
I'd still realize that our interests would be better served if we actually tried to be diplomatic with these "un-friendly" countries.
We could alienate them, as Bush and McCain would do, but that would only lead to them allying with China or Russia.
Act people, don't react.
I think that with foreign policy often decisions are made when the situation occurs. That's very much unlike economic or health policy which require active decisons rather than passive ones.
As such, I believe we should be comparing the candidates on terms of their domestic policy rather than foreign relations.
Regardless of this, I agree with Obama. That this, that the current strategy has actually enhanced Iran's standing in the middle east and so a change a tack might be needed.
The central argument against this seems to be that doing so will give Iran a level of 'legitimacy,' however the very fact that this debate is happening means that Iran already has that level of 'legitimacy.' Make it known that this fued will be braodcast on Iranian television!!
Therefore, effectively, we have nothing to loose from talking to Iran.
We have nothing to lose but perhaps Israel
"One of the things you have to ask yourself: What are George Bush and John McCain afraid of [in] demanding a country meets all of your conditions before you meet with them?" Obama said.
In a previous exchange, McCain blasted Obama for what he described as the Democrat's willingness to engage in unconditional talks with Hamas, an Islamic fundamentalist group the U.S. has labeled as a terrorist organization.
Obama denied McCain's claim, saying he would only talk to Hamas if the group renounced its call for Israel's destruction.
=======================================
McCain wants preconditions and it is wrong.
Obama wants preconditions and it is okay?
Those are Obama's words above, not mine.
McCainBush wants to bomb, bomb Iran. Talk about reckless. Can you imagine the firestorm this would unleash in the region. They are fed up with the US already but if this happens, our soldiers lives are worth nothing. And all for oil. And can you imagine where the price of oil would go ... would you say 10 bucks a gallon at the pump... and our economy... further down the crapper... incredible... Don't let this gun happy, war loving crook into the Oval Office... you will regret it...
How much oil are we getting from Iraq? You do know that France was getting 95% of Iraqi oil before the war and that is why they opposed any action in the UN Security Council. Germany was getting about 4% and they also opposed the war in '90.
I ask again.... how much oil are we getting from Iraq?
Iran is a 2-bit country that needs to be turned into a parking lot.
Economy-wise, it is simple. We jack up the price of wheat we are sending to the Arab countries and see what happens to the oil prices. They are robbing us and we are giving to them.
Grow up.
Nobody is going to dispute that Hamas has views contrary to our interests and the interests of our allies...and that they have supported anti-American and anti Israeli violence. They are clearly more of an enemy than a friend. Is that an excuse to ignore, shun, and refuse to talk to them?
Maybe we should invade them and try to force democracy down their throats so that they will be "free". The fact is that we can't do that--Lebanon has a democratic government. Hamas is the duly elected party chosen by the Lebanese people to rule that country. What we have to remember is that in a democracy sometimes the people choose the wrong folks to lead them, sometimes with disastrous results. (like ill conceived wars, economic hardship for the people, and a loss of personal freedoms) It sometimes happens here in the US too....
Like when we elected Klinton and were attacked 18 times by terrorists and he did nothing?
---------------------
You might think that killing terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan is wrong. You might think the government is wrong for going to war against terror.
But, if we were not killing them there, they would be here blowing up our schools and hospitals and malls.
Terrorist use exactly that... terror. While they are occupied in the two areas above, they aren't here.
Giving in to terrorist demands is giving them strength and additional numbers. Wholesale extermination decreases their numbers... literally and figuratively.
Some of you liberals need to travel and see what the real world is like. See terrorists in action. They are not rational. Hamas is a terrorist organization that terrorized the people to vote for them.
The problem Obama has in making that comparison to the fact that we were willing to talk with the USSR is twofold. First, we had no choice but to talk with the USSR due to the fact that they were another super power. The leaders of the USSR, however, were not complete psychos (with the exception of Stalin of course) and we could at least have reason to believe that they would act rationally and logically. Second is Iran is run by people who are not rational. Here we are talking about a bunch of religious psychopaths who believe that death and destruction here will lead them to heaven in the afterlife. They cannot be talked to or reasoned with. They can be and must be isolated or destroyed. These are the facts and you liberal nutt jobs out there who prefer appeasement should read a few books on what happened when Neville Chamberlain tried the same appeasement type tactics that Obama is espousing.
Also, Obama and his entire campaign are based on assertions made by an arm chair monday morning QB. He claims he would never have voted to authorize the war in Iraq, but that is very easy to say when you were not on the floor at the time was made. Sure he may have voted for a resolution against it in the senate of his home state, but had he been in the U.S. Senate and had the same access to the intelligence that the 100 senators who actually did have to vote on this, he may well have chosen differently. He bases the whole reason for his election upon the supposed fact that his is the superior judgment. Well people, any nutt can have superior judgment when he simply has to sit back and watch events unfold and then claim after they have taken place that he would have done differently.
He is a very charismatic guy, I will give him that. This is, however a case of the emperor wears no clothes. We cannot afford to fool ourselves into buying into this guy's line of crappola when we are involved in 2 wars and faced with the prospect of a 3rd with Iran. Elect a man who knows about war first hand. If there has ever been a guy more fitting for the needs of the country at election time than McCain, I have yet to see it.
The problem Obama has in making that comparison to the fact that we were willing to talk with the USSR is twofold. First, we had no choice but to talk with the USSR due to the fact that they were another super power. The leaders of the USSR, however, were not complete psychos (with the exception of Stalin of course) and we could at least have reason to believe that they would act rationally and logically. Second is Iran is run by people who are not rational. Here we are talking about a bunch of religious psychopaths who believe that death and destruction here will lead them to heaven in the afterlife. They cannot be talked to or reasoned with. They can be and must be isolated or destroyed. These are the facts and you liberal nutt jobs out there who prefer appeasement should read a few books on what happened when Neville Chamberlain tried the same appeasement type tactics that Obama is espousing.
Also, Obama and his entire campaign are based on assertions made by an arm chair monday morning QB. He claims he would never have voted to authorize the war in Iraq, but that is very easy to say when you were not on the floor at the time was made. Sure he may have voted for a resolution against it in the senate of his home state, but had he been in the U.S. Senate and had the same access to the intelligence that the 100 senators who actually did have to vote on this, he may well have chosen differently. He bases the whole reason for his election upon the supposed fact that his is the superior judgment. Well people, any nutt can have superior judgment when he simply has to sit back and watch events unfold and then claim after they have taken place that he would have done differently.
He is a very charismatic guy, I will give him that. This is, however a case of the emperor wears no clothes. We cannot afford to fool ourselves into buying into this guy's line of crappola when we are involved in 2 wars and faced with the prospect of a 3rd with Iran. Elect a man who knows about war first hand. If there has ever been a guy more fitting for the needs of the country at election time than McCain, I have yet to see it.
>>>Some of you liberals need to travel and see what the real world is like.
Haha. That's rich. Just on the basis of your comments you don't know the first thing about terrorism, or "the world" for that matter.
People like you are the reason why most of the world hates America right now. Not because of our freedoms, not because we are a wealthy and powerful nation. It is mindless idiots like you -- and all the other neocon commenters on here -- and your insultingly stupid rhetoric that lessens our superiority. You claim to love America and love Israel and then your policies cause damage to both.
Hey flyover, tell me, why do you even care about Israel? I care and I have my reasons, but why do YOU care? I'd like to know.
Pretty amazing how all of a sudden we see an influx of these insidious neocons. Must have thrown open the gates at the loony bin. GO BACK! PLEASE! They'll give you a candy bar!