[Bill,
August 6, 2007]
Oh no, I agree with Obama
Obama said he'd chase Al Qaeda into Pakistan if Musharraf wouldn't, and my fellow conservatives are freaking out.
Um. Wasn't the whole point of the invasion of Afghanistan to deny Al Qaeda a safe haven? And if the safe haven went across the border, hasn't our purpose been thwarted? And if they use that safe haven to attack the U.S. mainland, then wouldn't we have the same justification for attacking Warizistan?
But Pakistan is our ally. Fair enough. Actually, they've been a good ally. I certainly wouldn't invade Pakistan unless I was prepared to do some very nasty things (after, Pakistan is a nuclear power, but not one capable of surviving a first strike). But surely there must be a way to put even more pressure on Pakistan to close down the safe haven, including working jointly with the U.S. military there.
My point: Obama is closer to the truth here than the reflexive statement, "Oh we can't do that." We need to think about it. If we can't do it, then we might simply have to settle this war on Al Qaeda's terms.
Anyway, I'm sure, implicit in Obama's statement, is that he would flesh out the details later, and that necessary adjustments would be made depending on the circumstances.
Hate to agree with the other guys, but Obama's statement isn't irrational as everyone's making it out.
On the "Beltway Boys," Bill Kristol was aghast, saying it was obvious Iraq is the key and Obama didn't know what he was talking about. Well, I'd agree Iraq is a crucial battlefront in the fight against Al Qaeda. But the front line is that safe haven in Waziristan. You know, where Bin Laden and the other weasels are.
It seems to me, at least ...
Um. Wasn't the whole point of the invasion of Afghanistan to deny Al Qaeda a safe haven? And if the safe haven went across the border, hasn't our purpose been thwarted? And if they use that safe haven to attack the U.S. mainland, then wouldn't we have the same justification for attacking Warizistan?
But Pakistan is our ally. Fair enough. Actually, they've been a good ally. I certainly wouldn't invade Pakistan unless I was prepared to do some very nasty things (after, Pakistan is a nuclear power, but not one capable of surviving a first strike). But surely there must be a way to put even more pressure on Pakistan to close down the safe haven, including working jointly with the U.S. military there.
My point: Obama is closer to the truth here than the reflexive statement, "Oh we can't do that." We need to think about it. If we can't do it, then we might simply have to settle this war on Al Qaeda's terms.
Anyway, I'm sure, implicit in Obama's statement, is that he would flesh out the details later, and that necessary adjustments would be made depending on the circumstances.
Hate to agree with the other guys, but Obama's statement isn't irrational as everyone's making it out.
On the "Beltway Boys," Bill Kristol was aghast, saying it was obvious Iraq is the key and Obama didn't know what he was talking about. Well, I'd agree Iraq is a crucial battlefront in the fight against Al Qaeda. But the front line is that safe haven in Waziristan. You know, where Bin Laden and the other weasels are.
It seems to me, at least ...