You deal in a lot of supposed absolutes, which proves that you are not unbiased and that you don't think rationally:
we know he [McCain] is a great American and will not act irrationally with respect to our national security
McCain's colleagues in the Senate say he has an explosive temper and one of his Republican colleagues admitted that the thought of McCain being President with his finger on the red button sent chills down his spine. Won't act irrationally? That's not what his colleagues believe.
even a cursory look at Obama suggests that he is anti-American and lacks the experience to competently handle foreign policy
There is no evidence that Obama is anti-American. Quite the contrary, he doesn't believe that being a patriot means drinking Bush Jr's Kool-Aide, shutting off your brain, and blindly following policies that have bankrupted this country and makes our enemies stronger. We're in Iraq reconstructing their country, while ours crumbles at home. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda is gaining strength along with their Taliban allies along the Pakistani boarder. Obama was one of only a few people who had the common sense to oppose an unjust war from the beginning, whereas McCain wants us to remain there for the next 100 years. If foreign policy experience means being tortured in Vietnam and then rubber stamping the failed policies of Bush, then you can keep it. Those qualifications are not what we need to lead our country down a better foreign policy path.
Obviously, the war situation is improving (much to the dismay of the liberals), and in the end, I think it is highly likely Bush, Cheney, and the entire lot of them will be proven right. Iraq will become a positive influence for Iran and others in the area.
By what metrics can you make that claim? We're no closer to handing over security to Iraqis than we were in 2004. The political solution of reconciling Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis to joint rule seems a distant dream. Iran is now stronger than before the war and is more openly supporting terrorists now than before. We've spent $1 trillion on this stupid war, while a host of American domestic issues are left unresolved. Imagine what that money would have done for oil independence, which would bring us true national security and independence from the Middle East shithole.
I like the idea of Democracy in the Middle East as a way to bring about increased national security. However, oil independence is by far a superior solution. If we lead the way on that, the world would follow, and oil prices would plummet. When dictatorships can no longer rely on oil to prop up their undemocratic regimes, then the people of the Middle East will be forced to use their brains to make their lives better instead of getting money to blow other people up. Oil independence is a permanent solution, whereas shoving sham democracy down Arab throats hasn't gotten us anywhere, because voting isn't Democracy. The people themselves have to build the foundations of Democracy before their vote really means anything: a fair judicial system, a peaceful political reconciliation between warring factions, an uncorrupted legislative body, a functioning economy built on market freedoms and respect for law, and an educated population. Iraq has none of these, so voting at the booth for their officials is just window dressing.
All I can say to you is that I'm glad Bush's and the neo-con's days are over. The days of the Iraq war are now coming to a close and thank God for that. Now the US can get back on a decent path that will lead to more national and economic security, not one that leads to more war and deeper debt with nothing to show for it. |
