Barack Obama hits Hillary Clinton from an unexpected place -- the right. Obama has seen the poll numbers and he needs to make a strong statement about something... anything at this point. It could have been taxes, healthcare or some other red meat liberal issue, instead he talks tough militarily:
"Let me make this clear," Obama said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."
Earth to Barack, do you have any idea what kind of blowback would be involved in that? Pakistan is jihadi central with more madrassas than any other country in the world. People who become radicalized go there for training to spread their vision of the caliphate far and wide, how much of a quagmire that would be is incomprehensible. They have lands there that are not governable and the Pakistani army will not touch. Anyone with an iota of military sense knows full-well that the 4,000 killed in four years in Iraq would be a monthly number in Pakistan.
Perhaps a few facts have slipped by Obama and his staff:
- Musharraf is in a shaky position and would be overthrown as soon as we crossed the border;
- Pakistan has a nuclear arsenal that could be shipped anywhere;
- Pakistan is an ally in the War on Terror, albeit one that is not as strong as we'd like; and finally
- Al-Jazeerah will take this and use it for propaganda purposes tonight and inflame those who we need in this ongoing battle. The irreparable harm done can not be measured.
This is pure desperation on Obama's part and one can feel that he knows that he has to make a splash. This was probably the wrong way to do it.
Let me be clear about one thing: If we had intel concerning the whereabouts of Zawahiri or Osama bin Laden, I would be all for a quick strike in which we get in, get out and deny the whole thing so as not to arouse the Pakistani population. For all I know, we may have pulled raids such as that off. I am not for a full-scale invasion.
Join us next week as we dissect Barack Obama's plans to invade the holy city of Mecca.
Update (8/1/07 1400): The comments below made me think of something I omitted. Are those who support Obama in what he said going to support President Bush if he invade Pakistan tomorrow based on intel showing where bin-Laden is? Would they feel the same if bin-Laden were shown to be in Iran? Ask yourself those questions Obama supporters.
Update 2: OK, just to make it easy, here's the money quote (I generally prefer for people to click through to the link so they get the gist of the entire piece):
Obama said that as commander in chief he would remove troops from Iraq and putting them "on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan." He said he would send at least two more brigades to Afghanistan and increase nonmilitary aid to the country by $1 billion.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 5)
46. Obama is not naive. He is a man of vision and focus. Hillary is naive to think that if we continue to approach this new world of dangers with the same old strategies of the past it will not work. Just look at this mess that Bush and the neocons have given us in Iraq. You call this experienced leadership? Get Real America. This Iraq War will go down in history as one of the greatest Illusions and Military Blounders ever initiated by this government.
Too many Americans still in the John Wayne and World War II Movies mentality. Charge the hill and blow up the enemy because our military is all thats needed to protect us. That won't work anymore. Vietnam War and Iraq War have shown us that renegade outlaws like Al Queda along with world drug dealing barons have just as much devasting manpower as nation/state goevernments. Just look how 19 young men took a few airplanes and shut America down for 4 days on 9-11. None of them came from a military force acting in the interests of a nation.
America needs to wake up to truth. We need new thinkers like Obama who is willing to take a new course. The old one does not work. The last 40 years should teach us that. But most Americans are still in the dark ages and lack an understanding of history. We have selective amnesia problems.
NetResult at 5:01AM on Aug 2nd 2007
47. Those two words, "send troops" may be the kiss of death for Obama. A covert operation to nab the leaders would be great, but not thousands of our guys. We've had enough, done enough, and need to take care of our country. We did what we intended to do when we first went to Iraq. Our troops should come home. But then to send them back over...plulllease
S.H.Queen at 8:26AM on Aug 2nd 2007
48. This is only a ploy to foll the public into thinking he has some backbone...which in reality he doesn't.
mcleroy7 at 9:30AM on Aug 2nd 2007
49. It is the same cowboy attitude approach Pres. Bush used and Sen. Obama is trying to bank on ??!! Clealry his, (Obama) advisors need a lesson in Current Affairs. You cannot waltz into a country, regardless of who is there...2007, requires diplomacy. Musharraf is being sandwiched, America on the one side, a billion different party members on the other side, this guy has cheated death four times already, he has to tight rope try as mush as he can do without sparking a civil war. "Musharraf isn't doing enough"...BS, he is doing as much as he can do, given his restrictions, ability, etc...he is helping American out as mush as he can but his PRIORITY is to run Pakistan not keep America happy. Pres. Bush's priority should be AMERICA not Cheney's pockets and then some. The land mass (btwn Afganistan and Pakistan) isn't ruled by Musharraf but rather by warlords who are CRAZY by anyones standard, inclusive of 99% of Pakistani's. If anyone is to 'invade' it would be like USSR trying to capture Afganistan...not going to happen. Military force is not a solution, education, compassion, compromise, and FAIRNESS are real solutions. Case and Point: US is to give nuclear secrets to India even after US a couple of years ago threatened India with sanctions and etc, India basically said "screw you" and did what they pleased, and now US is giving them OUR secrets...and the neighbor, Pakistan is getting nothing? Fair? It's not wonder why the WORLD is not looking down upon the US, people looked to the US as a shining star, an example...but history will repeat and like the British Empire, US Empire has its days numbered unless we put honest people in position to run our government...sorry went off an a tangent
Adnan at 10:41AM on Aug 2nd 2007
50. As to "twisting Obama words", he said he would attack terrorists on Pakistan territory based on intelligence reports. Oh well, what if russians had unquestionable reports that chechen fighters are being trained in Illinois, does it gives them right to bomb Illinois? I dislike Obama after his African trip, but what he said now is not acceptable for me as well as to the whole world. We will see what other world leaders will say about this, but it does not help US.
Aleks at 10:27AM on Aug 2nd 2007
51. i am 100% behind 'President Obama"
i believe he has the solution to ending this Taliban Crap
we all know that much before 9/11, these Terrorist activities have been going on in pakistan with so many 'madrassas"
we also know that 'Most wanted Terrorists are holed in pakistan and enjoy special protection /status from pakistan govt
Musharaff is a "double crosser" who has sucessfully fooled america
if you have "Cancer in Your Throat", Doctor will diagonise your throat not your Feet
same way,al qaida cancer starts in pakistan not iraq
we have 100% proof of taliban/madrassas existing and on that basis alone we must strile and destroy these cancer cells
senator Obama-you have my vote
god bless america
gary at 10:49AM on Aug 2nd 2007
52. i am 100% behind 'President Obama"
i believe he has the solution to ending this Taliban Crap
we all know that much before 9/11, these Terrorist activities have been going on in pakistan with so many 'madrassas"
we also know that 'Most wanted Terrorists are holed in pakistan and enjoy special protection /status from pakistan govt
Musharaff is a "double crosser" who has sucessfully fooled america
if you have "Cancer in Your Throat", Doctor will diagonise your throat not your Feet
same way,al qaida cancer starts in pakistan not iraq
we have 100% proof of taliban/madrassas existing and on that basis alone we must strile and destroy these cancer cells
senator Obama-you have my vote
god bless america
gary at 10:46AM on Aug 2nd 2007
53. Just what we need: somebody in office who can successfully piss the rest of the world off at us
Chester Borland at 10:19PM on Aug 2nd 2007
54. The last two weeks have been about OBAMA, the Iowa numbers placing OBAMA 27 points ahead over Edwards and Hillary is the result of his skillfulness as a leader. Good, bad or indifferent. OBAMA is stating his POSITONS. He is presenting POLICIES. We as CONSTITUENTS can argue against his POSITON. We can laugh and call him “NAIVE” we can say he is not ready for prime time…Yet we will be talking about OBAMA POLICIES and what OBAMA has said he will or will not do asPRESIDENT. We will not be discussing Hillarie’s policies…WHY? Because she has not presented any policies on anything worst discussing. She attempted to re-vote here last vote for the war, she attempted to showboat and call the Pentagon regarding their process of removing troops from Iraq, she got lambasted for that. Yet all in all OBAMA is the “NAIVE” for saying if Terrorist are hiding in mountains in Pakastan and the leadership of that countries do not act, we will is, then I am NIAVE too. Because I want to know that we have a PRESIDENT who will act and take down Bin Laden and his crew at any cost.
blackmanvision at 12:04PM on Aug 3rd 2007
55. The last two weeks have been about OBAMA, the Iowa numbers placing OBAMA 27 points ahead over Edwards and Hillary is the result of his skillfulness as a leader. Good, bad or indifferent. OBAMA is stating his POSITONS. He is presenting POLICIES. We as CONSTITUENTS can argue against his POSITON. We can laugh and call him “NAIVE” we can say he is not ready for prime time…Yet we will be talking about OBAMA POLICIES and what OBAMA has said he will or will not do asPRESIDENT. We will not be discussing Hillarie’s policies…WHY? Because she has not presented any policies on anything worst discussing. She attempted to re-vote here last vote for the war, she attempted to showboat and call the Pentagon regarding their process of removing troops from Iraq, she got lambasted for that. Yet all in all OBAMA is the “NAIVE” for saying if Terrorist are hiding in mountains in Pakastan and the leadership of that countries do not act, we will is, then I am NIAVE too. Because I want to know that we have a PRESIDENT who will act and take down Bin Laden and his crew at any cost.
blackmanvision at 12:02PM on Aug 3rd 2007
56. The last two weeks have been about OBAMA, the Iowa numbers placing OBAMA 27 points ahead over Edwards and Hillary is the result of his skillfulness as a leader. Good, bad or indifferent. OBAMA is stating his POSITONS. He is presenting POLICIES. We as CONSTITUENTS can argue against his POSITON. We can laugh and call him “NAIVE” we can say he is not ready for prime time…Yet we will be talking about OBAMA POLICIES and what OBAMA has said he will or will not do asPRESIDENT. We will not be discussing Hillarie’s policies…WHY? Because she has not presented any policies on anything worst discussing. She attempted to re-vote here last vote for the war, she attempted to showboat and call the Pentagon regarding their process of removing troops from Iraq, she got lambasted for that. Yet all in all OBAMA is the “NAIVE” for saying if Terrorist are hiding in mountains in Pakastan and the leadership of that countries do not act, we will is, then I am NIAVE too. Because I want to know that we have a PRESIDENT who will act and take down Bin Laden and his crew at any cost.
blackmanvision at 12:02PM on Aug 3rd 2007
57. Obama didn't say he'd invade Pakistan, he said he'd be willing to take out Osama if there was actionable intelligence, and take out implies air strike, not invasion why doesn't anyone understand. Edwards and Clinton both had statements roughly along those lines. I as a Pakistani trust that Obama would make a reasoned and informed decicion.
Kamran at 8:09PM on Aug 3rd 2007
58. Will you be on the front line on the next war?
Jennifer at 11:25AM on Aug 7th 2007
59. "Why are you misrepresenting what Obama said? Your headline and the premise of your argument are completely FALSE, and twist Obama's words.
You were intelligent enough to include the actual quote, that was very good, keep it up. The problem is how you interpreted the last sentence: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."
Please explain to me how "acting" on intelligence equates to starting a war with Pakistan? It doesn't! To Obama, "acting" on intelligence could mean simply a quick air strike, exactly the same action you would recommmend."
gkmoid, if you hurl missiles into someone else's country against their wishes, that can be interpreted as an act of war by it's population. For all practical purposes, when one country performs operations against persons in a foreign country, by land, air, or sea, which are in opposition to the laws or wishes of that country, you have opened the door for a lawful declaration of war.
Love Obama if you must, but don't be so naive about it.
jklmn101 at 5:36PM on Aug 7th 2007
60. "Join us next week as we dissect Barack Obama's plans to invade the holy city of Mecca."
"President Obama Would Invade Pakistan"
That is the most redicules blog that I have read on the subject. The news coverage is and your blog are an indication of obama's inexperience. He is actually saying something and thinking for himself. It is easy to punch holes in it becuase it is something that is a real statement unlike all the other candidates politican bs. I am a soldier currently deployed to Iraq. I am actually on my r and r leave time right now and returning in a couple of days. We are fighting the wrong war, with no victory in sight. The Bush administration has failed to win the "WAR" at home. The have failed to sell the war to Democrats and Americans. And the republicans continue to tout the part line. The surge is working. The surge is working. Yeah right, it will still be 10 years before this goverment begins to form and be stable on its own, if it doesn't explode in civil war. He is in the process of destroying his own party, bankrupting our nation fighting the wrong war in the wrong country. To bad the democrat congress that was elected didn't do more these last few months. I do believe that they will get there chance, I just hope that the democrats can unify and bring a solid message and plan for change in Iraq and America that our deployed soldiers and citizens deserve. I have the audacity to hope that it won't be business as usual from the other side of the aisle. My bet is on obama.
robert.tindall at 2:24PM on Aug 10th 2007