SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bearcatbob who wrote (58418)4/9/2008 10:29:34 PM
From: Dale Baker  Respond to of 543242
 
A surgical strike on one terrorist group is one thing, and invading a country to change its regime and occupy it indefinitely is very much another, as we have learned at our cost.

No one on the Democratic side has advocated the latter under any circumstances that I have heard in this campaign.



To: Bearcatbob who wrote (58418)4/9/2008 10:35:14 PM
From: ChinuSFO  Respond to of 543242
 
Specificity.

Obama say: actionable intelligence about terrorists
McCain say: war against future enemies.

Obama say: like the missile attack on Afghanistan by Clinton
McCain say: like the attack on Iraq because of unfounded fear of "mushroom cloud."



To: Bearcatbob who wrote (58418)4/9/2008 11:00:38 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 543242
 
" John McCain said on Wednesday he would not rule out launching preemptive wars against future enemies."

Your man Obama said he would do that in Pakistan. What is the difference?


Hardly the same. The first is the invasion of a country to oust a particular regime; the second is a targeted strike at a group within the country plotting aggressive acts. And done on the basis, hopefully, of top flight intelligence.