McCain Mocks Obama's Iraq Views

[Psycho4Bud]

TYLER, Texas (AP) - Republican presidential hopeful John McCain mocked Democrat Barack Obama on Wednesday for saying he would take action as president ``if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq.''

``When you examine that statement, it's pretty remarkable,'' McCain told a crowd in Tyler, Texas.

``I have some news. Al-Qaida is in Iraq. It's called `al-Qaida in Iraq,''' McCain said, drawing laughter at Obama's expense.

Obama quickly answered back, telling a rally at Ohio State University in Columbus, ``I do know that al-Qaida is in Iraq.''

McCain said he had not watched the Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday night but was told of Obama's response when asked if as president he would reserve the right to send U.S. troops back into Iraq to quell an insurrection or civil war.

Obama did not say whether he'd send troops but responded: ``As commander in chief, I will always reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests. And if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad.''
World news Feed Article | World news |

FINALLY....somebody that'll stand up to Obamas' line of shit!:thumbsup:

IF you really want out of the war for good, better look at Nader. THIS assclown doesn't have clue...just a good speech.

Have a good one!:s4:

Psycho4Bud Reviewed by Psycho4Bud on 02-28-2008. McCain Mocks Obama's Iraq Views TYLER, Texas (AP) - Republican presidential hopeful John McCain mocked Democrat Barack Obama on Wednesday for saying he would take action as president ``if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq.'' ``When you examine that statement, it's pretty remarkable,'' McCain told a crowd in Tyler, Texas. ``I have some news. Al-Qaida is in Iraq. It's called `al-Qaida in Iraq,''' McCain said, drawing laughter at Obama's expense. Obama quickly answered back, telling a rally at Ohio State University Rating: 5

[dragonrider]

The original Obama statement was in response to a hypothetical question by Tim Russert. The question was something like, "If we were to pull our troops out of Iraq, and then the situation were to deteriorate, then would you reserve the right to go back in." I think I saw another thread here somewhere about Clinton getting slammed about not wanting to answer a hypothetical scenario, and now you can see why. Obama answers the hypothetical question that ingores Al Qaida being in Iraq, and now he gets characterized as thinking there is no Al Qaida in Iraq. It's the question that ignored Al Qaida in Iraq, not Obama --- you can't criticise Obama for answering a bogus hypothetical that ignores reality --- criticsie Russert for framing the question that way.

I think Obama makes a good point in that Al Qaida was not in Iraq until after the invasion. We are the ones who created the environment where terrorists could flourish. We took Iraq and turned it into Afghanistan. Of course, now that the terrorists are there, we have to deal with it. But Obama makes a good point about judgement. It was poor judgement to go into Iraq, and even poorer judgement not to fully commit if we were going to go in. Now we have created another terrorist state to deal with.

[Coelho]

We are the ones who created the environment where terrorists could flourish. We took Iraq and turned it into Afghanistan. Of course, now that the terrorists are there, we have to deal with it. (...) Now we have created another terrorist state to deal with.

Yes... and as it is a terrorist state, instead a sovereign nation, it "gives" (or at least they think) the right of the usa to stay there controlling the country, and taking care of all its oil... very convenient...

[Psycho4Bud]

The original Obama statement was in response to a hypothetical question by Tim Russert. The question was something like, "If we were to pull our troops out of Iraq, and then the situation were to deteriorate, then would you reserve the right to go back in." I think I saw another thread here somewhere about Clinton getting slammed about not wanting to answer a hypothetical scenario, and now you can see why. Obama answers the hypothetical question that ingores Al Qaida being in Iraq, and now he gets characterized as thinking there is no Al Qaida in Iraq. It's the question that ignored Al Qaida in Iraq, not Obama --- you can't criticise Obama for answering a bogus hypothetical that ignores reality --- criticsie Russert for framing the question that way.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Obama, I want you to respond to not holding oversight for your subcommittee. But also, do you reserve a right as American president to go back into Iraq, once you have withdrawn, with sizable troops in order to quell any kind of insurrection or civil war?

SEN. OBAMA: Now, I always reserve the right for the president -- as commander in chief, I will always reserve the right 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. So that is true, I think, not just in Iraq, but that's true in other places. That's part of my argument with respect to Pakistan.

The question...the answer...and yes, he should be mocked. How many times do we put a sizable number of troops in just to pull them out again? It's one of two choices:
1) Stay with it and get the job done.
2) Pull every last soldier, civilian worker, diplomat, etc...the hell out of there and leave it for shit.

You can't try to do the "right" thing while at the same time appeasing the "left".

Don't like the war? Want us out for good? Vote Nader "08"!

Have a good one!:s4:

[dragonrider]

I don't really agree with Obama's plan for the war, but there is nothing in that statement that indicates he doesn't think Al Qaida is in Iraq given the hypothetical nature of the question.

As for this:

How many times do we put a sizable number of troops in just to pull them out again? It's one of two choices:
1) Stay with it and get the job done.
2) Pull every last soldier, civilian worker, diplomat, etc...the hell out of there and leave it for shit.

You have to define "Stay with it and get the job done." When is the job done? I don't think we should leave it worse than it was when we got there. And it absolutely IS worse than when we got there five years ago, a lot worse. After five years and how many billions of dollars and how many thousands of lives lost or ruined, we've destroyed that country. We maybe had a chance at getting the situtation stabilized to our satisfaction five years ago before five years of incompetent mismanagement dug the hole so deep we may never get out. But now I don't know if we will ever get out cleanly.

I'm all for "getting the job done," but we need to know what "done" is going to be and we need to know how long we are going to work at getting it done. Is it one more year, five more, 20 more, or 100? Is it $100 billion more, $500 billion, or $1 trillion? How many more dead Americans, 100, 1,000, 5,000, 10,000? How many more disabled, 10,000, 20,000, 50,000? How many more dead Iraqis, 20,000, 100,000, a million? If we don't ever "get the job done," is there a point where we call it quits? Or do we work at getting it done no matter how long it takes, how much it costs, and how many people have to die?

[Psycho4Bud]

I don't really agree with Obama's plan for the war, but there is nothing in that statement that indicates he doesn't think Al Qaida is in Iraq given the hypothetical nature of the question.

So he'll go in IF Al-Qaida sets up...but till then his plan is to withdrawl troops. Since they're already there, as stated by McCain, isn't this just some politically correct babble? IF he acknowledges that they are there now why would he want to pull the troops out?

He's in a position where he either turns his party away from the correct answers OR he has to answer why he isn't going after Al-Qaida. It's easy to preach to the people.....harder to actually make them all happy.

McCain wants to stay till Iraq can stand on it's own.....Nader says enough is enough; we're done. I can respect both on their beliefs but this double babble b.s. that we are getting from the Democratic side is just that.

You have to define "Stay with it and get the job done." When is the job done?

The job is done when Iraq takes over all provinces....they're over half way there now. We've gone through some hard fighting to get this far; why pull out so they can set themselves back up? After all, according to Obama, we'd just have to go back in to clean it up AGAIN.

Have a good one!:s4

[melodious fellow]

Yes... and as it is a terrorist state, instead a sovereign nation, it "gives" (or at least they think) the right of the usa to stay there controlling the country, and taking care of all its oil... very convenient...

Very convenient indeed. World police all the damn time... military bases in 70 something countries. How many foreign countries have bases here? Not 70...

Foreign educational systems must really be that much better... it is a shame very few Americans see through all the shit..

The ability to effectively brainwash a nation is an amazing technology. :rastasmoke: