Home › Blogs › Jon Henke's blog ›

Barack Obama's superficial view of military policy

Submitted by Jon Henke on Thu, 08/28/2008 - 23:45
in

Barack Obama, tonight...

McCain says he'll follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he won't even follow him to the cave where he lives.

Tell us, Senator: in which cave does Osama bin Laden live?  

0
Your rating: None

Comments

With respect

Submitted by JayPe on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 01:15.

I think his point is that rather than focusing on Afghanistan where we knew Osama was, the army was diverted to Iraq. As a result of that decision Afghanistan wasn't cleaned out & we still don't know which cave Osama's living in.

It was said in a sort of pithy way, but even so I'd have thought you'd understand.

Quite a powerful speech from Obama. Whatever you say about him & his policies, he's a compelling orator.

You know what Clinton was doing when OBL was attacking?

Submitted by CF on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 06:47.

Invading tha Balkans instead. How fitting. Now, if only the Democratic Party would come out already and unveil its new name: The Hypocrisy Party.

You know what Bush was doing when OBL was attacking?

Submitted by brooklynkevin on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 07:53.

You can't have it both ways.  If you want to use "what Clinton was doing when OBL was attacking" as an example of a failing of the Democratic Party, then you will have to admit that the past 8 years of failure on the part of the Bush administration is indicitive of the failings of the Republican Party.  And to want to say now that McCain will be different, after he has voted with the Bush administration 95% of the time..., now that is what I call hyprocisy!

On the lighter side of things...sorry, I have to say this:

You know what Clinton was doing when OBL was attacking?

Reading "My Pet Goat". 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pet_Goat

 

So, let me get this straight...

Submitted by CF on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 10:10.

Holing OBL up in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan is worse than Obama (hypocritically, mind you) embracing a president who was to busy having an extramarital affair to defend the country from its known enemies but found time to create new ones the Balkans...Right.

Cheap shot

Submitted by johnson springs on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 06:12.

Bush failed to bring bin Laden to justice plain and simple.

Worse still, bin Laden's been allowed to rebuild his operational capabilities and to what extent he has succeeded remains a troublingly open question.

Funny how Clinton's failures in that regard...

Submitted by CF on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 06:43.

Are readily overlooked. Just saying.

Yep, it was

Submitted by Ironman on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 06:34.

Are you so sure of the accuracy of this statement?

Bush failed to bring bin Laden to justice plain and simple.

It's been quite some time since Bin Laden issued any videos or audios and at the time they were released there was widespread speculation it was a mashed-up "greatest hits" re-release

He may have died of natural causes in some cave for all we know. Actually, apart from the emotional satisfaction, it might be just as well. Can you imagine the spectacle of an American trial with the likes of the ACLU putting on a legal defense of this man?

As for bringing any terrorist to justice, what in Obama's resume qualifies him for this mission? Those con law lectures?  Voting to let infants die?  Getting a daily txt message from George Clooney?  

Response to JayPe

Submitted by Jon Henke on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 08:34.

I think his point is that rather than focusing on Afghanistan where we knew Osama was, the army was diverted to Iraq. As a result of that decision Afghanistan wasn't cleaned out & we still don't know which cave Osama's living in.

But that's just it.  We don't know that bin Laden is in Afghanistan, and we haven't know that since just about the time we first invaded.  In fact, it's widely believed - including by Obama - that Osama bin Laden is in Pakistan.  Obama knows we can't just "go get him" in Pakistan, and yet he criticizes McCain for not following him there? 

They are somewhat separate issues, but I would also argue that...

  • We cannot "clean out" Afghanistan no matter how many troops we place there unless we intend to simply occupy it in perpetuity and with hundreds of thousands of troops, and...
  •  As much as I'd love to see bin Laden dead, I'm not sure that we're less safe with him alive.  Osama bin Laden "hiding in a cave" may be less dangerous than Osama bin Laden, "Martyr and Inspiration to Jihadists." 
  • President Clinton acted appropriately, based on the information he had at the time.  In retrospect, it was incorrect, but the justifications they knew at the time, the opportunities they had to get him and the risks of doing so didn't add up to "go get him" then.  I'll be happy to listen to arguments to the contrary...but from people who were arguing in the 90's that we need to go get bin Laden.  People who just started saying "Clinton should have gotten him" after 9/11 don't have a lot of credibility on the score.

 

Clinton acted appropriately?

Submitted by CF on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 10:16.

Appropriately. Really? So, an international terrorist who has repeated attacked U.S. interests from 1993 to 1999 should not have been sought after directly, even if through high-level and secretive means? They'd try to impeach Bush if he had acted in such a way.

Please list for me the

Submitted by Jon Henke on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 10:28.

Please list for me the Republicans who were demanding we invade Afghanistan to get bin Laden at the time.

None to my knowledge, but that is not the point.

Submitted by CF on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 10:42.

The point is that OBL was a threat to the United States throughout the Clinton administration, and he wasn't stopped when opportunities were there for him to be. Besides, we both know that presidents see intel reports that members of Congress do not.

Secondly, if it is fair to argue that Bush started a needless war while the threat from al-Qaeda loomed, how is not fair to point out that Clinton did exactly that without his party calling him out on it?