MCCAIN 'S PROVEN Ineptitude in Foreign policy! He's BAD News for this country!
Edited on Wed Feb-14-07 04:53 PM by FrenchieCat
It appears that "Pow" War heror McCain was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG on how Iraqis would react if we invaded Iraq.
"Maverick" McCain lacked insight and wisdom.....
therefore, John McCain does not deserve to be President, because he lacks good judgment on foreign policy issues and incorrectly assessed a situation that has cost us too much.
In other words, McCain is unfit for command. :patriot:
McCain co-sponsored and voted for the IWR. He wrote this editorial prior to any intelligence being offered. In other words he was for the war before any evidence showed that
September 09, 2002 THE ROAD TO BAGHDAD Originally appeared in the September 9, 2002 issue of TIME
America's voice, as expressed by our government, must be outspoken in support of democratization in all of these countries. The global success of liberty is America's greatest strategic interest as well as its most compelling moral argument. All our other interests are served in that cause. The more countries that are governed with the consent of the governed, the fewer there will be where resentment caused by corrupt rulers can be misdirected toward the U.S.
Change must also come, soon, to Iraq. I share the President's sense of urgency about ending the regime of an often irrational aggressor, a mass murderer who has used chemical weapons on his own soil, persists in violating the terms of the cease-fire that ended the Gulf War and is committed to acquiring nuclear weapons.] When he does acquire them, containing his aggression will be far more difficult; he will perceive cooperation with terrorists as a lesser risk to himself; and threats to his rule could be the occasion for a savage man's last blaze of infamy. SNIP Our regional allies who oppose using force against Saddam Hussein warn of uncontrollable popular hostility to an American attack on Iraq. But what would really be the effect on Arab populations of seeing other Arabs liberated from oppression? Far from fighting to the last Iraqi, the people of that tortured society will surely dance on the regime's grave. I wish the Bush Administration and its predecessor had given more serious support to internal and external Iraqi opposition than has been the case. But it's a safe assumption that Iraqis will be grateful to whoever is responsible for securing their freedom. Perhaps that is what truly concerns some of our Gulf War allies: that among the consequences of regime change in Iraq might be a stronger demand for selfdetermination from their own people. http://mccain.senate.gov/press_office/view_article.cfm?id=786
2. YEs....and I think we must start "framing" these candidates before
they get off the ground.
The media is saturating the news cycle with aims at the Democratic candidates, but never the Republican ones.....far as I can tell. Sure some minor stuff, but never anything big!
McCain supports escalation of the War. He is unfit for command! He was wrong before, and looks like he's about to be wrong again!
Plus he flip/flopped just on the troop escalation issue!
HE'S UNDECISIVE and therefore, UNFIT FOR COMMAND! -------------------------------------- McCain’s Escalation Numbers Game
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is the most prominent advocate of escalating the war in Iraq. Yet, as some have noted, his “straight talk” on the issue has been extremely muddled.
Below, a timeline of McCain’s multiple positions on escalation:
October 27, 2006 — McCain Calls For 20,000 More Troops in Iraq:
Reporters asked him to elaborate on his statement last week in Iowa that more combat troops are needed in Iraq to quell a “classic insurgency.”
“Another 20,000 troops in Iraq, but that means expanding the Army and the Marine Corps,” he said.
January 4, 2007 — McCain Calls For 30,000 More Troops In Iraq:
MCCAIN: I would advocate two additional combat brigades in Anbar province, four in Baghdad, with one in reserve. That’s around 30,000.
January 4, 2007 — McCain Suggests 20,000 Troop Escalation Is Too ‘Small’:
LAUER: The president seems to be settling on the 20,000 number. Is this a numbers game? Will 20,000 do the job, in your opinion?
SEN. MCCAIN: I’m not sure. … I have not seen the exact plan, so it’s hard for me to know. But to make it of a short duration and a small size would be the worst of all options to exercise, in my view.
January 5, 2007 — McCain Says He Is ‘Not Specific on Numbers’ About Troops in Iraq:
QUESTION: How many troops are you calling for in Iraq?
MCCAIN: We are not specific on numbers, we don’t have — we are talking about 3 or 4 combat brigades, in Baghdad, and one or two more in Anbar province. We are not that much detailed oriented.
6. Who wants McCain for president when even his own state doesn't want him.
This is from AZBlues's recent post. Check it out!
The recall application filed Tuesday with the Arizona Secretary of State's Office accuses McCain of 'shirking his duties as a senator from the great state of Arizona' and of having 'acquiesced in his role as a member of the legislative branch to strongly check the power of the chief executive, who has for all intents and purposes become a king.'
AZ wants to recall him for dereliction of duty. We already have a president like that...who needs another one?
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
