-begin update- (~1yr after original post) Looks like George Bush took the advice from the infancy of the Obama campaign and invaded Pakistan himself. Horray.
(keep reading if you want, this is now a deprecated article)
-end update-

Presidential Candidate Barack Obama and rival to Hillary Clinton brilliantly retorted to criticism that he was a naive idiot concerning foreign policy by announcing a naive and idiotic foreign policy. Successfully distancing himself from Hillary, Obama promised he was willing to be even less careful and more aggressive with military incursions into foreign countries without their permission. He promised to insult and alienate an important American and NATO ally in the occupation of Afghanistan. He also promised he would insult, alienate, and incite the inhabitants of a proud Muslim nation in political crisis by invading it under a similar premise that George Bush uses to continue his occupation in Iraq. In “Obama threatens military force against Al Qaeda in Pakistan” (Chicago Tribune) he is quoted using similar fear-baiting rhetoric Bush-Cheney administration has become so famous for. “…There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again…. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharaf will not act, we will.”. Just lovely, he promises to use a strange Axe Wielding Ogre mentality that not even Bush has the nerve to enact or even threaten to enact. This would make for strange and confusing U.S. Diplomacy when just weeks ago, Obama promised he would talk to each and every criminal dictator the world has to offer in his first year as president. If Obama does win election it will be worse than Carter, the last time a religious ignorant Democrat with little experience was elected president. Personally, I am not that worried so long as Obama makes all his slip-ups during his campaigns, which seems to be the way its going. I never would have thought he would describe a foreign policy even more brazen and dangerous than Bush-Cheney would come up with!

My question is: why is the media reporting this as a horse race? Maybe that expression is cliche, but really, why? Why do I see headlines like “Obama: If Pakistan doesn’t hit Al Qaeda, US must” that seem strait out of the campaign PR department? Why not describe the foriegn policy he actually sets out and cut out all the rhetoric in a similar manner I did instead of horse race coverage. They dwell on the idea that he is countering criticism from the Hillary camp, but BIG DEAL. Obama is announcing what is a very radical shift and potentially very dangerous in an unstable nuclear power like Pakistan: to invade their territory whenever we feel like they aren’t “doing enough”. And the fact Obama uses shameless rhetoric needs to be pointed out. It is irresponsible they just repeat the rhetoric without pointing it out as rhetoric. The rhetoric I am referring to is very powerful and provocative “Al Queda…who murdered 3,000 Americans”. Well, it isn’t exactly accurate is it knowing what we know?

We lost our chance to do much of anything in Pakistan a long time ago. Osama and the like will have to be caught on the terms of the nation(s) in which he dwells. It is a fact of life that might be hard to accept for those that lead or wish to lead a nation that thinks itself to be all-powerful. This means long-term strategy. Terrorism was not stamped out in the U.K. overnight. It had roots that were long reaching, and the solution had to be deep rooted. The same obviously applies here, but as long as important candidates like Obama ignore this with pandering and dangerous rhetoric no problems surrounding the arab/islamic terrorism problem will ever be solved.

Posted by admin in Effyou