Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Obama Talks Tough on Terrorism

The New York Times reports that Senator Barack Obama gave a major speech on terrorism earlier today. In his speech Obama said that the United States should shift its focus from the war in Iraq to a fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He feels that the Pakistani government has not done enough to eradicate terrorism cells within its borders. He chided the Bush administration for rushing into war with Iraq, leaving the US more vulnerable to attack than before 9/11, and not pressuring the Pakistani government in rooting out Al-Qaeda in their country.

Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act we will."

And he also indicted Congress for our present state of affairs: “Congress rubber-stamped the rush to war, giving the president the broad and open-ended authority he uses to this day. With that vote, Congress became coauthor of a catastrophic war. And we went off to fight on the wrong battlefield, with no appreciation of how many enemies we would create, and no plan for how to get out.”

Read the entire New York Times article here.

plez sez: the only downside of this speech was that it was Senator Obama rather than President Obama giving it! Obama has consistently spoken out against the War in Iraq since he's been in the Senate, and his assessment of the terrorism threat is right on. Al Qaeda (and Osama Bin Laden) have enjoyed safe haven in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 9/11, and neither country has done anything to bring them to justice for what happened on that fateful day. Instead of concentrating on a known threat, President Bush pushed his private agenda of removing Sadaam Hussein from power and basically gave comfort to our sworn enemies!

this speech will also go a long way to establishing Obama's foreign policy credentials, in light of the Hillary Clinton comments about his inexperience. to be honest, i like his "inexperience," it means that we'll get a new way of doing things in Washington, instead of the failed retread policies of the Bush and Clinton administrations!

11 comments:

tom said...

agreed. the more i think about it the more i realize that, aside from kosovo, clinton was very weak and wobbly on foreign policy, and i expect no more from hillary. obama continues to tell it like it is, even though unilateral military intervention by the u.s. in pakistan would be an extraordinary disaster! one of these days these people are going to realize that you can't just "take the world and tinker with it as you see fir" (chuang tsu)

tom said...

"as you see fit", that is ...

plez... said...

tom,
i don't agree with unilateral military interventions (a la Iraq) without a compelling objective. i have to believe that Obama's comments were predicated on the US exhausting all diplomatic channels with Musharraf prior to our tanks rolling into the mountains of Pakistan ("if... President Musharraf won't act, we will.").

i am happy to see Obama stepping out and talking foreign policy (obviously an area where he lacks experience)... but please remember, Bush surrounded himself with foreign policy experts (Cheney, Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, et. al.) and see where that got us!

Homeland Colors said...

If America is to be protected form terrorist, it won't be because we invade nations and change their governments, it'll be because we find terrorist where they hide and do away with them. Obama understands that fact and is actually planning to take action that will protect our nation rather than lashing out at a random country in the middleeast because his gut tells him so. I'm proud to be an Obamite and look forward to calling him Mr. President.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

Exodus Mentality and Field Negro are quoted at the Democratic Afrosphere blog concerning the (near total futility of) participation in the 2008 presidential election.

But, both say they're going to vote in spite of their misgivings.

The Democratic Afrosphere blog hopes is fomenting discussion and engaging our brothers and sisters about whether there is really any point in electing Obama (or Clinton) president, and ending the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency.

I believe there is, but I also acknowledge that some people whom I respect a lot disagree with me, and their legitimate reasons for doing so must be acknowledged and addressed. There is good reason for skepticism about the validity of the US electoral system.

There is also good reason for skepticism in the value of the dollar, but none of us is throwing our dollars away just yet. Until they're replaced with another currency, or a viable bartering system, dollars are the only hard currency most of us have.

As I said at the Democratic Afropshere blog, I believe Obama hit the honey pot of foreign policy electoral politics with the speech you reference above.

plez... said...

yeah, i have few misgivings about the Obama campaign and it's going to be a "tough row to hoe" in order for him to even get the nomination, much less win a general election (given the fact that the Dems haven't done a lot with their majority and mandate during this last session).

i can only hope for the best. his foreign policy speech goes a ways to giving him some footing outside of a domestic agenda.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

Black-on-Black Crime: No one is saying anything - including the Democrats.

CapCity said...

Has anyone heard anything about Obama being Anti-Muslim? A blogger left a comment on one of my posts stating such, but has not responded to my request for proof. So, I came over to my trusted political source;-)

plez... said...

CAP,
you give me WAY TOO MUCH CREDIT... plezWorld is just a feeble manifestation of my warped mind, i hope you don't believe this stuff! *smile*

but to answer your question, i have not heard that Obama is an Anti-Muslim. his father was from Kenya and he spent a considerable amount of his early education in Southeast Asia (i think), and with a name like Barack Hussein, i truly think that he would lean Anti-Muslim!

David Sullivan said...

I agree with Barrack, but isn't he stating the obvious? Within a month of 9/11 we were in Afganistan looking for Osama, then the executive branch decidied to spin everything to put the focus on Iraq not only allowing the terrorist in Afganistan and Pakistan to reload, but infiltrate Iraq and kill more Americans. This debacle has reached 'Nam levels.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

Clinton/Obama 2008, Because White Male Supremacy Is No Solution to the Problems Facing America, at the Democratic Afrosphere Blog.