On November 29, 2002 on CNN’s Late Edition, Sen. McCain said, "We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies....I don’t think it’s easy, but I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time."In contrast, Obama made a prominent speech around the same time, October 2, 2002, in which he said, "But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. "I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al-Qaeda." Obama correctly foresaw the consequences of the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history. McCain won't even support vets after the bloodletting? Which candidate do you think is more "naive on foreign policy and not as qualified to lead the military?"
Comments are closed for this post.
