Pages

Saturday, September 6, 2008

McCain Loses Sight of the Real War in Afghanistan

It's just natural that forgetfulness comes with age. But Rachel Kleinfeld, executive director of the Truman National Security Project, blogs at the New York Times that John McCain's forgetfulness about our most important war (in combination with his bad temper) might not be the best characteristics to put in the White House:

Curiously, for all his fighting words, there was one fight that Senator McCain forgot to mention Thursday. And that was Afghanistan. The country did not appear once in his speech. Nor did it appear in Sarah Palin’s speech on Wednesday, or in Joseph Lieberman’s the night before.

What are we to make of a fighting man who has forgotten a war? Who has forgotten, in fact, our principle war: the one against Al Qaeda, the terrorist force that attacked our country? In a 45-minute speech, John McCain did not mention Afghanistan because it is there that his choice to fight in Iraq had its most serious negative consequences. It’s in Afghanistan that the cost of pulling troops to fight in Iraq meant that we still have not found Osama bin Laden, or the rest of Al Qaeda’s senior leadership. It is in Afghanistan that veterans have been forced to patch metal on a pick-up truck to create some protection for themselves as they drive through mined canyons. It’s there that veterans have buried fellows who died to gain ground — and given up that ground days later, for lack of troops to hold it. Despite his own, moving service in war, it is in Afghanistan that Senator McCain has broken his trust with today’s armed services [Rachel Kleinfeld, "The Wrong Fight," New York Times: Campaign Stops, 2008.09.05].

For the record: In his RNC acceptance speech, McCain mentioned neither Afghanistan nor Osama bin Laden. He mentioned al Qaeda by name once. In his DNC acceptance speech, Obama mentioned Afghanistan three times, bin Laden twice, and al Qaeda once.

As Kleinfeld says, being a fighter is great. It certainly appeals to the inattentive voter who responds to simple macho B.S. But the good fighter knows how to pick the right fight.
kk

2 comments:

  1. Well put. Obama has indicated that he would go after terrorists wherever they are. The trick is, of course, knowing where they are before launching a strike. In my opinion, we need improved intelligence (smarter spies).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Badly put, The fact that it wasn't mentioned is more likely due to the fact that it is to a much greater degree been handed over to the grand international community that Obama thinks can deal well with problems like Georgia and Iran. It is also due to the fact that the resurgence of the Taliban is rather pitiful at best and doesn't threaten US security. Obama has said he would go anywhere after terrorist, but that is simply a lie, as much to himself as us. I do not believe the man would ever start a war, I do not think he would ever make a decision that would sacrifice innocent people to kill an enemy, and I do not think he can recognize evil in people like Putin even now. I do not think he would ever do anything to stop terrorism that the ACLU would construe as violating rights. He lack courage and he lacks clarity.

    PS. Bin Laden dead doesn't hurt terrorism, it would just feel good.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are closed, as this portion of the Madville Times is in archive mode. You can join the discussion of current issues at MadvilleTimes.com.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.