Obama “Never” Has Doubts About Foreign Policy Experience
This is going to be a busy week on the Obama overseas trip. I’m in Chicago waiting for the bus to take us to Midway Airport and the charter that will fly us to meet with Obama in Jordan.
I want you to think of this blog as a clearing house all week of information on Obama’s trip. I will post as often as I can with my observations, reporting and interaction with Obama and his senior staff. I will also try to provide you transcripts of interviews along the way and any impressions I may have of them. As you already know, lots of reporters are on this trip and I want to give you as much access as I have to the totality of the interviews Obama does, not just the one or two answers you may hear on the radio or see on TV.
CBS News correspondent Lara Logan interviewed Obama in Kabul, Afghanistan, today and it aired on CBS’ Face the Nation. Logan made news, first in asking Obama if he ever had any doubts about his foreign policy experience. Obama, as this post’s headline says, gave a one word answer that may inspire as many as it scares: “Never.”
Logan also dug deep on Obama’s publicized declaration on Aug. 1, 2007, in a significant speech on a new policy toward the war in Afghanistan, that if the U.S. possessed actionable intelligence on Usama bin Laden’s exact location and the Pakistan government refused to attack to capture or kill, the U.S. would act unilaterally. That comment gave a new-found muscularity to Obama’s attitudes about how to use military force to win the war on terror. It also drew criticism from some in the Bush administration and from John McCain and others. In the passage of time that criticism has been boiled down to mean Obama was wrong to say the U.S. would act unilaterally. In fact, the criticism was principally that no U.S. president or candidate for the presidency should say such things publicly because they disrespect Pakistani sovereignty and complicate internal discussions on a wide-array of terrorism related issues.
Logan forced Obama to concede that was he was proposing — unilateral military action to capture or kill bin Laden based on actionable U.S. intelligence — was not a departure from current Bush policy. That may not seem like much of a development, but it strikes me as something where Obama was forced to admit he had in public created a false premise from which to attack the president and, by extension, anyone who criticized this open declaration of unilateral military action in a foreign country. Now, this is no way undermines Obama’s criticism that the war in Afghanistan has suffered as a result of the invasion of Iraq. But it may give ammunition to Obama critics who say his lack of experience leads him to make say things a potential U.S. president ought not to say, especially when what his saying doesn’t plow new policy ground but may make the ground in which the current policy exists harder to plow.
Readers might also find interesting Obama’s answer and what “victory” will look like in Afghanistan. Some may find the definition vague, others appropriately broad because the NATO-led effort has lost so much ground. Obama also calls for fresh action to prepare for additional troop deployments now, a sign that he has fully internalized the complex nature of moving combat forces and the accompanying support troops from one battlefield to another. Obama also said it would be up to Pakistan to deal with Al Qaeda training camps in its borders, conceding that the only way the U.S. could act unilaterally is if it knew where bin Laden was and could either capture him or kill with a very high level of certainty. This also shows an awareness of the current political and tactical difficulties in dealing with Al Qaeda in Pakistan. As long as the Pakistan government is the chief beat cop in the no-man’s land where bin Laden and associates hide out, it will be very difficult to shut down the training camps Much has been made this week of Bush following Obama on troop withdrawal timetables. It seems today Obama, while not necessarily “following” Bush in dealing with UBL and Al Qaeda training camps in Pakistan, was openly conceding the military options in this theater are limited….maddeningly limited.
Here is the full transcript of Logan’s interview with Obama. It starts with what we call in television a cold open, wherein Obama starts speaking without the benefit of the first question being asked (apologies to any who find the cold open tutorial insulting).
Obama: I believe U.S. troop levels need to increase. And I for at least a year now have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three. I think it’s very important that we unify command more effectively to coordinate our military activities.
But military alone is not going to be enough. The Afghan government needs to do more, but we have to understand that the situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus, the central front on our battle against terrorism.
Logan: Why does it have to be the central front? What is — what is so critical to U.S. interests here?
Obama: This is where they can plan attacks. They have sanctuary here. They are gathering huge amounts of money as a consequence of the drug trade in the region. And so, that global network is centered in this area.
And I think one of the biggest mistakes we’ve made strategically after 9/11 was to fail to finish the job here, focus our attention here. We got distracted by Iraq.
And despite what the Bush administration has argued, I don’t think there’s any doubt that we were distracted from our efforts not only to hunt down Al Qaida and the Taliban, but also to rebuild this country so that people have confidence that we were here to stay over the long haul, that we were going to rebuild roads, provide electricity, improve the quality of life for people.
And now we have a chance, I think, to correct some of those errors. There’s starting to be a growing consensus that it’s time for us to withdraw some of our combat troops out of Iraq, deploy them here in Afghanistan, and I think we have to seize that opportunity. Now is the time for us to do it.
I think it’s important for us to begin planning for those brigades now. If we wait until the next administration, it could be a year before we get those additional troops on the ground here in Afghanistan, and I think that would be a mistake. I think the situation is getting urgent enough that we have got to start doing something now.
The United States has to take a regional approach to the problem. Just as we can’t be myopic and focus only on Iraq, we also can’t think that we can solve the security problems here in Afghanistan without engaging the Pakistan government.
Logan: How do you compel Pakistan to act?
Obama: Well, you know, I think that the U.S. government provides an awful lot of aid to Pakistan, provides a lot of military support to Pakistan. And to send a clear message to Pakistan that this is important, to them as well as to us, that I think — that message has not been sent.
Logan: Under what circumstances would you authorize unilateral U.S. action against targets inside that tribal areas?
Obama: Well, what I’ve said is that if we had actionable intelligence against high-value Al Qaida targets and the Pakistani government was unwilling to go after those targets, that we should. Now, my hope is that it doesn’t come to that, that in fact, the Pakistani government would recognize that if we had Osama bin Laden in our sights, that we should fire or we should capture and (inaudible)…
Logan: Isn’t that the case now? I mean, do you really think that if the U.S. forces had Osama bin Laden in their sights and the Pakistanis said no, that they wouldn’t fire or wouldn’t go after him?
Obama: I think actually this is current doctrine. There was some dispute when I said this last August. Both the administration and some of my opponents suggested, well, you know, you shouldn’t go around saying that. But I don’t think there’s any doubt that that should be our policy, and will continue to be our policy.
Logan: But it is the current policy.
Obama: I believe it is the current policy.
Logan: So there’s no change then.
Obama: I don’t think there is going to be a change there. I think that in order for us to be successful, it’s not going to be enough just to engage in the occasional shot fired. We’ve got training camps that are growing and multiplying…
Logan: Would you take out all those training camps?
Obama: Well, I think that what we’d like to see is the Pakistani government take out those training camps.
Logan: And if they won’t?
Obama: Well, I think that we’ve got to work with them so they will.
Logan: But would you consider unilateral U.S. action?
Obama: You know, I will push Pakistan very hard to make sure that we go after those training camps. I think it’s absolutely vital to the security interests of both the United States and Pakistan.
Logan: Because you do have a situation seven years on into this war where Osama bin Laden and all hislieutenants and all the leaders of the Taliban, they’re still there. And they’re inside Pakistan.
Obama: Right. It’s a huge problem. And first of all, if we hadn’t taken our eye off the ball, we might have caught them before they got into Pakistan and were able to reconstitute themselves.
So we made a strategic error, and it’s one that we’re going to pay for, and unfortunately the people of Afghanistan have paid for as well.
But we now have an opportunity to correct that problem. One of the — if you look at what’s happening right now, in Iraq Prime Minister Maliki has indicated he wants a timetable for withdrawal. That is the view of the vast majority of Iraqis as well. We’ve seen a quelling of the violence. We haven’t seen as much political progress as needs to be made, but we’re starting to see some efforts on the part of various factions to deal with some of the issues that are out there.
Logan: Token efforts at best, though, wouldn’t you say?
Obama: They are token efforts at best, but if we have a timetable and they suddenly see an urgency behind the fact that the American troops are going to be leaving and that they need to get their act together, then this is the perfect moment for us to say we are going to shift our resources, we’re going to get a couple of more brigades here into Afghanistan, we’re going to — and it’s not just brigades. We’re also going to be upping our financial aid to Afghanistan. We’re going to be willing to increase our foreign aid to Pakistan. In exchange, we’re going to expect that Pakistan takes much more seriously going after Al Qaida and Taliban-based camps on their side of the borders.
Logan: What would be mission accomplished for you in Afghanistan?
Obama: Well, mission accomplished would be that we have stabilized Afghanistan, that the Afghan people are experiencing raising — rising standards of living, that we have made sure that we are disabling Al Qaida and the Taliban so that they can no longer attack Afghanistan, they can no longer engage in attacks against targets in Pakistan, and they can’t target the United States or its allies.
Logan: So losing is not an option.
Obama: Losing is not an option when it comes to Al Qaida, and it never has been. And that’s why the fact that we engaged in a war of choice when we were not yet finished with that task was such a mistake.
Logan: Do you believe the war on terror can be won if Osama bin Laden is still alive and if he’s still out there?
Obama: I think there would be enormous symbolic value in us capturing or killing bin Laden, because I think he’s still a rallying point for Islamic extremists. But I don’t think that by itself is sufficient. I think that we are going to have to be vigilant in dismantling these terrorist networks.
Logan: OK, last question. There is a perception that you lack experience in world affairs.
Obama: Right.
Logan: Is this trip partly aimed at overcoming that perception that, you know, there is doubt among some Americans that you could lead a country at war as commander in chief from day one?
Obama: You know, the interesting thing is that the people who are very experienced in foreign affairs I don’t think have those doubts. The troops that I’ve been meeting with over the last several days, they don’t seem to have those doubts.
So the objective of this trip was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to 10 years.
And it’s important for me to have a relationship with them early, that I start listening to them now, getting a sense of what their interests and concerns are.
Because one of the shifts in foreign policy that I want to execute as president is giving the world a clear message that America intends to continue to show leadership but our style of leadership is going to be less unilateral, that we’re going to see our role as building partnerships around the world that are of mutual interest to the parties involved.
And I think this gives me a head start in that process.
Logan: Do you have any doubts?
Obama: Never.
I’m a bit concerned lately about the weight of the issues that our next president will have to face. While I have voted Republican for years, I am beginning to realize that McCain has no idea how to deal with foreign policy and with our economy (he has admitted that he does not understand our current financial and real estate crisis … and he has admitted that he does not understand the roots of our recession. I guess it would be tough to expect someone who has been very, very wealthy for a very, very long time to understand what the average, white American like me is facing. I hope we make it through this and God will ultimately lead the way, but we also need good policies and McCain seems incapable of delivering on that.
I am beginning to finally realize that Republican politicians do not at all stand for those things that help the middle class, average American. Republican politicians stand for enriching other wealthy people like themselves. Their tax policy is no way helps me and other average Americans … it is a party that stands for furthering the cause of other wealthy people on Wall Street, our Plastic Surgeons, our Corporate Attorneys, and our Business Executives.
I can’t pull myself to vote for Obama, but I plan to stay at home and not vote this time. Who knows, maybe Obama will continue to show that he is fighting for average, middle-class Americans …I can’t see it now, but I may vote for him.
If anyone shares my thoughts or can help me as I think through these thoughts, please feel free to email me back. God bless you and God Bless America.
Absolutely… He shouldn’t have any doubts about where he wants to lead the country in terms of foreign policy.
I agree that we need to start being cooperative players on the world stage again…..
If he doubted that we would be able to do this then he wouldn’t be a very good president.
Hussain is the biggest “EMPTY SUIT I THINK I HAVE EVER SEEN”. He and MZ.MICHELLE are a national problem in the making.
For more on Lara Logan and her reporting
check out ERSNews.com /The Enterprise Report
http://www.ersnews.com/permas_stories_updates/LL.htm
For this hollow-experienced, hollow-hearted but ambitious, cunning political talker,
his answer, to most of the issues with any DOUBT, has to to be the NEVER! He knows that he is fooling of himself but it’s doesn’t a matter, the main purpose is that he wants to FOOL all us!
His overall experiences to be qualified to run for the highest position in the nation is actually a bigest DOUBT in the American modern history, yet he was “selected ” by those blindly and hypocritical politicians!
Just use our common sense, to handle any foreign policy is no way to compare as easy as it having debat on the congress floor. Obama’s most marketable experience
is nothing but barely limited in such aspect.
Oh yes, when he talks, people listern! Because his charming appearance and talking skill are much better than most of the sneak-oil salesmen at the country fairs!
You guys may interview him as many times as you want, and he will give you the answers with POSITIVE and FIRM tune which you all like to hear, but the CHANGE is always available later.
He is as hot as a iron rod right now, but it won’t be too long he will be gradually melting down, when he runs out of the whole bag of tricks. The people will know that he is not for REAL, and he can’t be the leader of this greatest country under any circumstances for the year of 2008.
Chrene
Obama will destroy our country.
Response to the comment by Show Me
Your right, absoluately, he shouldn’t have any doubts. Because with his thiner than “skin-deep” experiences in every practical domestic and foreign affairs, he really knows nothing about it, than naturely it shouldn’t be any doubts popes out of his head. In this case, the question: Doubts? the answer: Never! It’s logical. It also means: Never= Don’t Know!
It has to be the greatest political joke of the year: Talking foreign policy and foreign relations by/from/with Obama? Give me a break!
Don’t be so blindly making mistake with the cost of no one can afford!
Chrene
Obama is all fluff. It’s ALL about staging. ‘Make you feel good’ speeches instead of talking about his views on the topics. Why? Because his far-left ideals are very risky in a General Election.
Greatest site ever .. click here
It just makes me sick to see Obama acting like he is already the President. Does the arrogance of this guy never end? McCain has talked to all these national leaders also, without all the fanfare that Obama is getting and that he wanted. These reporters were invited along by Obama! McCain could have had them along also but didn’t want them because it is inappropriate for someone who is not the President. Even our diplomats don’t get this much media attention when they talk to foreign leaders. It is absolutely shameful!
One thing that also stuns me is that Obama as the head of the Committee on Afganistan is just now getting around to visiting the country! He has never been there before, he has never held a meeting of this Committee on Afganistan, yet he has so eloquently spoken over the last year and a half about how we were wrong to go to Iraq when we should have concentrated on Afganistan. So where has he been? Don’t tell me he was too busy campaigning, because he is still doing that. If he couldn’t do the job on the Afganistan Committee he should have resigned. At least maybe someone else would have spoken out and done something about the Afgan situation getting worse before it got as bad as it is. It just amazes me how many people are fooled by this idiot.
Cathy,
Obama will destroy our country!!! Bush and his cronies have already done that.
Obama has more intelligence, tact, and diplomacy in his little finger than either Bush or McCain could even imagine. McCain still believes Czechoslavia exists and couldn’t say Lexington, Massachusetts after 2 days of coaching. He has voted several times against allowing health insurance companies to cover birth control pills but doesn’t mind that Viagara is covered. We have only just begun to realize the true damage the current administration has done to this country. We simply cannot afford another “Richpublican.”
I just can’t help but keep trying to have this basic and short “comment” to be posted here. Hope I got lucky this time!
OBAMA and CHANGE
“O”riginal “B”elief “A”nnoy “M”ajor “A”mericans and “C”haracteristic “H”ollow “A”long “N’ational “G”eneral “E”lection
God bless America!
Chrene
It is shocking that this man, Obama, is being given a pass by the mainstream media — and he is. Not only by the liberal media, but by “fair and balanced” Fox News as well.
He is totally unqualified to hold the office of the presidency, yet no one will say it. That we would have a candidate who must visit foreign countries months before an election in an effort to acquire, overnight, some credential, is nothing short of amazing.
His following is that of a cult. This man is dangerous. Could he make an excellent president? Sure. Could he be an absolute disaster? Absolutely.
You don’t play dice with the future of the country, and this is precisely what the enamored electorate is doing. I don’t care that the Europeans love him. I don’t care that various terrorist regimes and Mideastern countries love him.
We are electing a president of the United States. OUR interests must come first. Is McCain the perfect candidate? No, he isn’t. But he is a known quantity, and that is far better than gambling on the nation’s future with an inexperienced unknown.
Diplomatic engagement with Iran. Emphasis on Afghanistan. Timeline “horizon” for Iraq withdrawal.
Did the Bush administration – and by extension, John McCain – just adopt Obama’s foreign policy?
I’m confused…which candidate shows poor judgement?
I think Barack Obama actually makes a lot of sense. He wants to pull out of a needless and tiring war.
The only knock I ever hear on him is his race, religion (Christian), or his middle name..all which are not the real issues.
The real issues are the WAR IN IRAQ and the ECONOMY.
War In Iraq
McCain-2004 says we’ve won the war..Mission Accomplished!!
Obama- 2002 says WTF are we doing in Iraq…He was right!! NO WMD, NO Cheap Oil, NO connection to 9/11!!
Economy
McCain- Doesn’t know how to type an email
Obama- Has a blackberry and wants to help the Middle Class (6.6% unemployment in Ohio..heartland of America) He also wants to stop spending 10 Billion a month in Iraq!!
CASE CLOSED- People vote with your brains for once..please!! Stop voting b/c McCain looks like the the classic republican, he’s not the answer and u know it.
OBAMA ‘08 and I am born and raised in Ohio..the state the whole election hinges on..
I love Barack Obama.
Fox “News” is simply one big biased editorial to serve the Republican Party. I gave up being Republican once I realized they don’t protect our constitutional rights, they serve only big money interests and they have expanded government control of our lives. And they have run the country into such debt our grandchildren will be burdened with the bill for their out-of-control spending.
McCain’s whole family was bred for war. I prefer electing a statesman who will look at the bigger picture and choose other courses of action than saber-rattling and war. Our place in the world is in serious jeopardy since the reckless rush to war in Iraq. We need mending, not more mayhem.
Obama has already shown amazing ability to assemble the best people to be part of his teams of advisers he assembles. I will count on him to put together a top notch team to run our great country.
McCain ditched the wife who stood by him during his years in captivity once he came home. She had an accident and no longer was the beauty he expected to return to. So he fooled around and ended up with a rich, rich gal who had looks and money. Since he couldn’t be loyal to a wife who had stuck by him through those years in captivity, then frankly he has no character or loyalty….. or family values. He is an empty shell and quite an opportunist. I would not trust him to act in the interests of the country….. only his own selfish interests.
D.C. from Atl.,
why should he have any doubts about what he believes about the world and how to tackle our problems? Is experience,the kind that we have in such abundance with likes of cheney,rumsfeld etc,that has left this country economically on its knees and mired us in Iraq where really we have to obsess daily on the surge as although the country we destroyed solely depends on just that one refrain.Thankfully,Obama seems to know quite alot and thanks to his Iraq and afghan plan that the inept admistration is finally coming along albeit on the ‘horizon’.The iraqis are endorsing his plan and finally we can sit with our sworn enemies,Iran, in Geneva. Thank god for Obama for his courage and wisdom to advance these progressive policies that will see tha US flourishing again once he becomes president. Am delighted that i’d rather elect someone who cares about fixing this economy and not a warmonger destined to stay the course and continues sinking billions of unaccounted for tax dollars,whick we’d rather be spending on our education,healthcare and revamping the military.As we speak,Obama is no doubt setting the tone of the debate and mccain is just left to respond.We need some leadership from Mccain ,,not just playing defense..
Capt. Jerry,
Show some substance man ,,,nobody cares about the emptiness you are exhibiting.talk substance not hatred and meaningless rants.God bless Obama and Michelle..perfect American story and family.No divorcee,,,perfect family man. ….Remember ,,’whats in a name….a rose by any other name would smell as sweet’ Go Obama Go!
It’s sad that so many that post here, are too closed-minded to actually pay attention to what Obama is saying. Instead, it’s all about calling him names, without hearing a word, he says.
And that’s the biggest problem in this Country now – - so many people are voting AGAINST their best interests.
The funniest one, to me, are the people with little money, who whine about the *Death Tax.”
They don’t realize that if it were repealed, that they would be the ones making up the difference… in essence, subsidizing the very wealthy. Of course, we’ll also be doing that, if McCain becomes President, and the Bush tax cuts become permanent.
I can understand people of means, voting GOP, but those in the lower-to-middle classes, you may as well slit your own throats, if you’re going to vote GOP. You’re being duped… just look what has happened to the middle-class.
Back to foreign policy, the most evident thing about what Obama says, is that he actually thinks about this stuff. What a change if we had a President, with curiosity, and capable of using his intellect to formulate policy… rather than just making threats, and war.
This is a big joke.
A person with no experience with no record to back up what he is saying is a big joke.
From a community organizer to state senate with many “present” votes and no record of accomplishments, made a great speech, then got lucky to get elected as US Senator and no record of doing anything and now he wants and said he will make a good President.
This is a very crazy idea and reckless.
Someday if he has something to show, I might consider voting for him but not now.
McCain is safer for America.
This dog and pony show set up by the Obama camp, it much too little too late. They are parading Obama around the world, and I heard he is even using an earpiece to make sure he doesn’t say some really whacked out things out there… This man has no clue about foreign policy, or how to run our great country.
Thanks Major for a fair and concise report. Many of the other networks are sugar coating every move Obama makes.
Of course he has doubts, or at least serious concerns, even an expert can have doubts, especially something as difficult as foreign affairs. During an election time or in office he can’t say that he has doubts. Oh, well McCain seems to have some big doubts, or doesn’t know about problems there are with our economy as the first commenter discusses. How does that feel, that your next president is clueless to the problem let alone a method to correct it.? Every good commander knows he has to look as if he has no doubts. He can sometimes flip but he can’t wiggle. But Obama is smart (and that’s not a negative), and you have to learn a lot and quickly as president which his predecessor did not not seem so adept at. Does he have the depth of knowledge I would like to see, no. But I think by the time he gets to office he will have absorbed plenty and he’s seen and survived combat in a manner already. So some of you flame-like commenters, please don’t read so much into political wording, especially one word. Are you voting the same party yet again, don’t you have a ‘doubt’?
You have given me new hope in our country Card Carrying Republican. I respect honest conservative issues. Though I do have a problem with forcing social conservatism on the nation. I have no problem with the social conservative way of life, however I do have a problem when that lifestyle gets forced upon me. I vote Democrat, though I hate doing it because they don’t represent me very well. There are crooks on both sides of the aisle, but I really do think that the Republican Party has been corrupted from its once pure ideology. There are good decent, honest Republican officials out there, but the party has largely become corporatist.
I have one issue from this blog that I have to address though. There is a large difference from unilaterally invading a countries sovereignty to apprehend a rogue individual, and unilaterally invading a country to overthrow that government. I know I cannot back the latter, however I have yet to decide on the former. I think it was wrong for the author to lump these in under the same umbrella.
On a side note. We invaded a country on manipulated evidence. It’s not that hindsight is 100%, it’s that blinders were put on us by the administration. Attacking a country other than in self defense is the definition of an illegal war by the UN.
I have been on the other side of the fence. People like D.C., Captain Jerry do not differentiate between war and diplomacy. Their style of foreign policy is perceived as “USA being bully” by other nations. If they think being bully is the only diplamacy left then hard workign American will continue to sacrifice. We are in the time of global economy and information age. Rich people are not affected by war. They play in the international arena. There are many companies who operate in the interational market, owned by people in power position and have offices abroad. Hard workign Americans are being rebuked of being non-patriotic and paying higher prices at the gas station.
Dicotomy:
Democrates will give middle class tax break, tax rich which is needed to balance the budget, conclude the war (war turned out to be very expensive), improve public service and take care of veterans (many patriotic rich people do not mind paying back to improve the services and overall quality of life in the society). Rich people (also called elitists) vote for democrates. But majority of hard working Americans still vote republican due to social issues. There are few like Card Carrying Replican who are realizing this dicotomy.
I have been an avid Democrat my entire life. I don’t just vote, I get involved. I went to both Inaugurals for Clinton, campaigned for Kerry and Gore. This year I’m voting for McCain. I cannot believe that the Democratic party with an array of candidates well versed in foreign policy such as Dodd, Richardson, and Clinton would end up with a neophyte whose only foreign policy credentials are imaginary. Our country deserves better than that.
It really tickles me to hear the absurd comments about Senator Obama’s alleged lack of foreign policy experience! Think about it people, I seem to remember George W. Bush had ZERO exposure to any country other than the USA, Mexico, perhaps Canada and Costa Rica – until he was President, Bush had never even visited the Middle East and I am convinced that Bush never had any Muslim friends until after he was President, either!
For the record, we Americans have become so accustomed to the lack of finesse in public speaking, the poor quality of reasoning and the calloused, stubborn and contrary nature of George Bush that we no longer recognize personal quality, excellence in deportment or aplomb or polished intelligence when we encounter those desirable attributes…! At the least, we should yearn for those traits in our political leaders, shouldn’t we?
I have lived and worked in 75 countries, including 4 years in the Middle East (mainly in Saudi Arabia, with side-trips to Kuwait, UAE, Israel, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan) – and I believe I can help you relate to and understand Senator Obama’s perspective a little better by describing his background.
Senator Obama’s mother worked for the US-State Department and as such Senator Obama’s childhood was spent in different countries and he attended Foreign Service schools (which teach the same subjects we learned in American-based schools) – his mother and his grand-parents were Christians and raised him in Christian teachings and doctrines, he has NEVER been a Muslim and further more he was not been brought up in Islam either, in fact, many years ago he received Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior – and his wife is also a born-again, baptized Christian!)
Now I explained all of those facts to say this final point – when you have had a chance to live and work and play with people in different countries who are of different cultures, races, economic classes, etc., you learn ways of dealing with them, communicating with them, understanding their hopes and motivations and you learn how to get along with them and convince them to go along with your reasonable requests too.
During the last 7+ years the USA has been very weak and ineffective in working with other people, other races and other cultures – and we haven’t really shown any interest in becoming better at dealing with others either. Senator McCain is an affable person but it takes a willingness, commitment and aptitude to work well with others that McCain simply has not demonstrated in his career or his positions – the USA can not afford McCain’s style of leadership any longer, it’s time to reach for the candidate who has best shown those qualities, that is Senator Obama.
It really tickles me to hear the absurd comments about Senator Obama’s alleged lack of foreign policy experience! Think about it people, I seem to remember George W. Bush had ZERO exposure to any country other than the USA, Mexico, perhaps Canada and Costa Rica – until he was President, Bush had never even visited the Middle East and I am convinced that Bush never had any Muslim friends until after he was President, either!
For the record, we Americans have become so accustomed to the lack of finesse in public speaking, the poor quality of reasoning and the calloused, stubborn and contrary nature of George Bush that we no longer recognize personal quality, excellence in deportment or aplomb or polished intelligence when we encounter those desirable attributes…! At the least, we should yearn for those traits in our political leaders, shouldn’t we?
I have lived and worked in 75 countries, including 4 years in the Middle East (mainly in Saudi Arabia, with side-trips to Kuwait, UAE, Israel, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan) – and I believe I can help you relate to and understand Senator Obama’s perspective a little better by describing his background.
Senator Obama’s mother worked for the US-State Department and as such Senator Obama’s childhood was spent in different countries and he attended Foreign Service schools (which teach the same subjects we learned in American-based schools) – his mother and his grand-parents were Christians and raised him in Christian teachings and doctrines, he has NEVER been a Muslim and further more he was not been brought up in Islam either, in fact, many years ago he received Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior – and his wife is also a born-again, baptized Christian!)
Now I explained all of those facts to say this final point – when you have had a chance to live and work and play with people in different countries who are of different cultures, races, economic classes, etc., you learn ways of dealing with them, communicating with them, understanding their hopes and motivations and you learn how to get along with them and convince them to go along with your reasonable requests too.
During the last 7+ years the USA has been very weak and ineffective in working with other people, other races and other cultures – and we haven’t really shown any interest in becoming better at dealing with others either. Senator McCain is an affable person but it takes a willingness, commitment and aptitude to work well with others that McCain simply has not demonstrated in his career or his positions – the USA can not afford McCain’s style of leadership any longer, it’s time to reach for the candidate who has best shown those qualities, that is Senator Obama.
Thank You.
Response to the comment by Sam Kings, Dallas July 21, 2008
Hi Good morning Sam, the beginning of this Monday surely makes me feel lucky,
because this gentleman just made the comment as same thought as I was planning
to respond to you a while ago.
So, please take a glance at the comment by jt on this page, you will be one more step closer to realize and understand the TRUTH about your idol, he is not for REAL,
he is a good communities organizer and a good senator, but he is absoluately NOT READY for this highest position/toughest job at the present time, period.
Have a good day!
chrene
A SAD COMMENTARY ON OUR TIME AND OUR COUNTRY
THAT SUCH A PUTRID LACK OF CHARACTER IN BOTH
OUR CANDIDATES THIS SEASON. JUST HOPELESS.
DUMP OBAMA!
Those writing negatively and fuming with rage about Barack can fume all they want. The guy has been right all along. He opposed this dumb war imposed on this nation of sophiscates by some dumb neo-cons;and he is been proved right. He advocated that we talk directly to Iran–now bush is doing just that. He said we should be serious on Pakistan, and all military commanders are saying he is right. He has been calling since last year, to increase troops in Afghanistan and once again milatry commanders are calling for just the same thing. If those talking trash about Barack will open their eyes and see through the gimmicks being played on us by these repugnant republicans, they will come around and see the light. Please seek knowledge and free yourselves from bigotry and hatred. I believe most of you hate him because he is black. And you will go to church on sundays and sit in the pews and claim you are christians. God may indeed be laughing.
All you bloggers, Obama is A CHICAGO POLITITIAN thats all you need to know and
the only reason you need for not voting for him. I live in Illinois and trust me Chicago
politics are the most corrupt in the nation.
Please remember that Supreme Court judges are in the balance here. Our
nation follows their rules and we don’t need far left judges to take over. Remember
how close the gun vote was.
[...] Lewis Fox News has this headline: Obama “Never” Has Doubts About Foreign Policy Experience Logan: Do you have any [...]
It is so humorous to see people say that they have always voted Republican, but are pulling the trigger for Obama. I would say they need to check out the 9th commandment, because they are lying through their teeth.
Put it this way, if partial-birth abortion, gay marriage, welfare entitlements, and dismantling our military capabilities is what kind of Republican you were, then you probably need to move to the inner city where you will fit right in.
[...] * Excuse the Fox link, it was the easiest transcript I could find of Obama’s somewhat embarrassing foriegn policy interview. [...]
America- Dump Obama and his grandstanding speeches that say nothing. We deserve better.
The more the MSM media anoints him as the new Christ, the more I wish I had as many votes as Obama has faces.
the ONLY foreign experience that obama has is what he learned from his university “friends” that are anti america and are radical and extreme muslims. i believe that most of them teach at the university of chicago . he has NO experience because he has never been anywhere in the middle east. sure hes been to the muslim nation of indonesia, whoopie, but he was a boy of 8 or 9 years old. he has NEVER made any policy or written any policy dealing with how we get along with other nations. NEVER. so where WHERE is his expereince on foreign policy? somebody please tell me!!!!
Comment by Bill Thomas
July 21st, 2008 at 4:26 am
It really tickles me to hear the absurd comments about Senator Obama’s alleged lack of foreign policy experience! Think about it people, I seem to remember George W. Bush had ZERO exposure to any country other than the USA, Mexico, perhaps Canada and Costa Rica – until he was President, Bush had never even visited the Middle East and I am convinced that Bush never had any Muslim friends until after he was President, either!
For the record, we Americans have become so accustomed to the lack of finesse in public speaking, the poor quality of reasoning and the calloused, stubborn and contrary nature of George Bush that we no longer recognize personal quality, excellence in deportment or aplomb or polished intelligence when we encounter those desirable attributes…! At the least, we should yearn for those traits in our political leaders, shouldn’t we?
I have lived and worked in 75 countries, including 4 years in the Middle East (mainly in Saudi Arabia, with side-trips to Kuwait, UAE, Israel, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan) – and I believe I can help you relate to and understand Senator Obama’s perspective a little better by describing his background.
Senator Obama’s mother worked for the US-State Department and as such Senator Obama’s childhood was spent in different countries and he attended Foreign Service schools (which teach the same subjects we learned in American-based schools) – his mother and his grand-parents were Christians and raised him in Christian teachings and doctrines, he has NEVER been a Muslim and further more he was not been brought up in Islam either, in fact, many years ago he received Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior – and his wife is also a born-again, baptized Christian!)
Now I explained all of those facts to say this final point – when you have had a chance to live and work and play with people in different countries who are of different cultures, races, economic classes, etc., you learn ways of dealing with them, communicating with them, understanding their hopes and motivations and you learn how to get along with them and convince them to go along with your reasonable requests too.
During the last 7+ years the USA has been very weak and ineffective in working with other people, other races and other cultures – and we haven’t really shown any interest in becoming better at dealing with others either. Senator McCain is an affable person but it takes a willingness, commitment and aptitude to work well with others that McCain simply has not demonstrated in his career or his positions – the USA can not afford McCain’s style of leadership any longer, it’s time to reach for the candidate who has best shown those qualities, that is Senator Obama.
Thank You.
________________________
Bill you never siad anything about about obama/s foreign policy experience. you said that he got along well with others and learned their ways and culture, well so did i caise my dad is retired navy and we traveled all over the world and i went to school with many differing culturs. that doesnt mean i know anything about foreign policy. POLICY is the key word here. what he did as a boy in indonesia ( recall that he never lived in any other country outside the US except for the muslim country of indonesia) is the same thing that all children do in school. he played, his friends called him barry, he learned a bit about america AND about islam (indonesia is almost ALL muslim). he lived with his grandmother who was a bank vice prersident and sent him to better schools …in HAWAII! his mother did NOT belive in GOD and he said this himself. he only joined a church because he had to. he was “advised” that he needed to be a member of a christain church and had to find a wife so that he could enter into poilitcs where people would take him seriously. his father and his fathers fols ARE muslim and will tell you so right now. a REAL family man is not ashamed of his family members no matter who or what they are but we dont hear much of anything about his grandmother, who is still alive, we dont see her, we dont see his brother mark (oh i forgot, obama DISOWNED him because he refused to stay in kenya and help the family..instead wnating to come to the US and attend universitry). i dont think you really know enough about him to say that he is an expert in foreign policy, if he is then so is every member of a retired military family!
Considering Obama is a “very inexperienced” first-term junior senator, a President Obama is a truly scary thought! WAKE UP VOTERS!
I think you should consider who Obamas advisers are – and start getting some info on them.
Start with Zbigniew Brzezinski –
then you’ll know why Obama has no doubts about foreign policy.
Obama has 300 advisers, so shouldn’t you get started getting to know them? You’ll find Brzezinski on UTube for a quick overview.
[...] the bus to take us to Midway Airport and the charter that will fly us to meet with Obama in Jordan.read more | digg [...]
Senator Obama is turning out to be a real disappointment and a very dangerous man. Moving the war on terror to Pakistan could have disastrous consequences on both the political stability in the region, and in the broader balance of power. Scholars such as Richard Betts accurately point out that beyond Iran or North Korea, “Pakistan may harbor the greatest potential danger of all.” With the current instability in Pakistan, Betts points to the danger that a pro-Taliban government would pose in a nuclear Pakistan. This is no minor point to be made. While the Shi’a in Iran are highly unlikely to proliferate WMD to their Sunni enemies, the Pakistanis harbor no such enmity toward Sunni terrorist organizations. Should a pro-Taliban or other similar type of government come to power in Pakistan, Al-Qaeda’s chances of gaining access to nuclear weapons would dramatically increase overnight.
There are, of course, two sides to every argument; and this argument is no exception. On the one hand, some insist that American forces are needed in order to maintain political stability and to prevent such a government from rising to power. On the other hand, there are those who believe that a deliberate attack against Pakistan’s state sovereignty will only further enrage its radical population, and serve to radicalize its moderates. I offer the following in support of this latter argument:
Pakistan has approximately 160 million people; better than half of the population of the entire Arab world. Pakistan also has some of the deepest underlying ethnic fissures in the region, which could lead to long-term disintegration of the state if exacerbated. Even with an impressive growth in GDP (second only to China in all of Asia), it could be decades before wide-spread poverty is alleviated and a stable middle class is established in Pakistan.
Furthermore, the absence of a deeply embedded democratic system in Pakistan presents perhaps the greatest danger to stability. In this country, upon which the facade of democracy has been thrust by outside forces and the current regime came to power by coup, the army fulfills the role of “referee within the political boxing ring.” However, this referee demonstrates a “strong personal interest in the outcome of many of the fights and a strong tendency to make up the rules as he goes along.” The Pakistani army “also has a long record of either joining in the fight on one side or the other, or clubbing both boxers to the ground and taking the prize himself” (Lieven, 2006:43).
Pakistan’s army is also unusually large. Thathiah Ravi (2006:119, 121) observes that the army has “outgrown its watchdog role to become the master of this nation state.” Ravi attributes America’s less than dependable alliance with Pakistan to the nature of its army. “Occasionally, it perceives the Pakistan Army as an inescapable ally and at other times as a threat to regional peace and [a] non-proliferation regime.” According to Ravi, India and Afghanistan blame the conflict in Kashmir and the Durand line on the Pakistan Army, accusing it of “inciting, abetting and encouraging terrorism from its soil.” Ravi also blames the “flagrant violations in nuclear proliferation by Pakistan, both as an originator and as a conduit for China and North Korea” on the Pakistan Army, because of its support for terrorists.
The point to be made is that the stability of Pakistan depends upon maintaining the delicate balance of power both within the state of Pakistan, and in the broader region. Pakistan is not an island, it has alliances and enemies. Moving American troops into Pakistan will no doubt not only serve to radicalize its population and fuel the popular call for Jihad, it could also spark a proxy war with China that could have long-lasting economic repercussions. Focusing on the more immediate impact American troops would have on the Pakistani population; let’s consider a few past encounters:
On January 13, 2006, the United States launched a missile strike on the village of Damadola, Pakistan. Rather than kill the targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s deputy leader, the strike instead slaughtered 17 locals. This only served to further weaken the Musharraf government and further destabilize the entire area. In a nuclear state like Pakistan, this was not only unfortunate, it was outright stupid.
On October 30, 2006, the Pakistani military, under pressure from the US, attacked a madrassah in the Northwest Frontier province in Pakistan. Immediately following the attack, local residents, convinced that the US military was behind the attack, burned American flags and effigies of President Bush, and shouted “Death to America!” Outraged over an attack on school children, the local residents viewed the attack as an assault against Islam.
On November 7, 2006, a suicide bomber retaliated. Further outrage ensued when President Bush extended his condolences to the families of the victims of the suicide attack, and President Musharraf did the same, adding that terrorism will be eliminated “with an iron hand.” The point to be driven home is that the attack on the madrassah was kept as quiet as possible, while the suicide bombing was publicized as a tragedy, and one more reason to maintain the war on terror.
Last year trouble escalated when the Pakistani government laid siege to the Red Mosque and more than 100 people were killed. “Even before his soldiers had overrun the Lal Masjid … the retaliations began.” Suicide attacks originating from both Afghan Taliban and Pakistani tribal militants targeted military convoys and a police recruiting center. Guerrilla attacks that demonstrated a shocking degree of organization and speed-not to mention strategic cunning revealed that they were orchestrated by none other than al-Qaeda’s number two man, Ayman Al-Zawahiri; a fact confirmed by Pakistani and Taliban officials. One such attack occurred on July 15, 2007, when a suicide bomber killed 24 Pakistani troops and injured some 30 others in the village of Daznaray (20 miles to the north of Miran Shah, in North Waziristan). Musharraf ordered thousands of troops into the region to attempt to restore order. But radical groups swore to retaliate against the government for its siege of the mosque and its cooperation with the United States.
A July 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concludes that “al Qaeda is resurgent in Pakistan- and more centrally organized than it has been at any time since 9/11.” The NIE reports that al-Qaeda now enjoys sanctuary in Bajaur and North Waziristan, from which they operate “a complex command, control, training and recruitment base” with an “intact hierarchy of top leadership and operational lieutenants.”
In September 2006 Musharraf signed a peace deal with Pashtun tribal elders in North Waziristan. The deal gave pro-Taliban militants full control of security in the area. Al Qaeda provides funding, training and ideological inspiration, while Afghan Taliban and Pakistani Tribal leaders supply the manpower. These forces are so strong that last year Musharraf sent well over 100,000 trained Pakistani soldiers against them, but they were not able to prevail against them.
The question remains, what does America do when Pakistan no longer has a Musharraf to bridge the gap? While Musharraf claims that President Bush has assured him of Pakistan’s sovereignty, Senator Obama obviously has no intention of honoring such an assurance. As it is, the Pakistanis do just enough to avoid jeopardizing U.S. support. Musharraf, who is caught between Pakistan’s dependence on American aid and loyalty to the Pakistani people, denies being George Bush’s hand-puppet. Musharraf insists that he is “200 percent certain” that the United States will not unilaterally decide to attack terrorists on Pakistani soil. What happens when we begin to do just that?
Americans are hanging on to their seats while they wait for the end of President Bush’s continuous wreckage of the past 8yrs when it comes to world affairs. In some important issues,I am confident Obama would change the course and the public perception of America around the world. He will continue the open talks with our enemies such as Iran, Syria and Cuba(Ironically Bush administration has begun)He will also end torture and close Guantánamo. I also believe he will rebuild the strength with our allies. ON the other hand, we have a presumptive nominee that doesn’t know the diff between Sunni and Shite muslim. Wake up people!!
The ONLY foreign experience that obama has is what he memorized from his university “friends” that are anti America and are radical and extreme Muslims. I believe that most of them teach at the University of Chicago. He has NO experience because he has never been anywhere in the Middle East. Sure has been to the Muslim nation of Indonesia.
___________
Aady
Did you see it? One more time? You won’t get faked out here!
http://www.SelectWealthSystem.com/?t=wc
[...] are poised to see elected a man who says Logan: Do you have any [...]
[...] You see, The Messiah is always consistent, never wrong, and as he says, “never” has any doubts. [...]
[...] Obama maintains that he “never has doubts about his foreign policy experience.” [...]
[...] Obama “Never” Has Doubts About Foreign Policy Experience “…CBS News correspondent Lara Logan interviewed Obama in Kabul, Afghanistan, today and it aired on CBS’ Face the Nation. Logan made news, first in asking Obama if he ever had any doubts about his foreign policy experience. Obama, as this post’s headline says, gave a one word answer that may inspire as many as it scares: “Never”…” [...]
[...] of Arrogance: Pelosi and Revisionism of Catholic Dogma Jump to Comments On July 20, during an interview with CBS News correspondent Lara Logan in Kabul, Afghanistan, Democrat presidential hopeful Barack [...]