This is the toughest I have heard him talk, and he is 100% right on Obama says he might send troops to Pakistan Democratic hopeful said Musharraf should do more about terrorists Updated: 8:09 a.m. CT Aug 1, 2007 WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he would possibly send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists, an attempt to show strength when his chief rival has described his foreign policy skills as naive. The Illinois senator warned Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf that he must do more to shut down terrorist operations in his country and evict foreign fighters under an Obama presidency, or Pakistan will risk a U.S. troop invasion and losing hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid. “Let me make this clear,” Obama said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. “There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.” The excerpts were provided by the Obama campaign in advance of the speech. Obama’s speech comes the week after his rivalry with New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton erupted into a public fight over their diplomatic intentions. Obama said he would be willing to meet leaders of rogue states like Cuba, North Korea and Iran without conditions, an idea that Clinton criticized as irresponsible and naive. Obama responded by using the same words to describe Clinton’s vote to authorize the Iraq war and called her “Bush-Cheney lite.” Thousands of Taliban fighters are based in Pakistan’s vast and jagged mountains, where they can pass into Afghanistan, train for suicide operations and find refuge from local tribesmen. Intelligence experts warn that al-Qaida could be rebuilding here to mount another attack on the United States. Musharraf has been a key ally of Washington in fighting terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, but has faced accusations from some quarters in Pakistan of being too closely tied to America. The Bush administration has supported Musharraf and stressed the need to cooperate with Pakistan, but lately administration officials have suggested the possibility of military strikes to deal with al-Qaida and its leader, Osama bin Laden. Destabilizing? Analysts say an invasion could risk destabilizing Pakistan, breeding more militancy and undermining Musharraf. The Pakistani Foreign Office, protective of its national sovereignty, has warned that U.S. military action would violate international law and be deeply resented. A military invasion could be risky, given Pakistan’s hostile terrain and the suspicion of its warrior-minded tribesmen against uninvited outsiders. Congress passed legislation Friday that would tie aid from the United States to Islamabad’s efforts to stop al-Qaida and the Taliban from operating in its territory. President Bush has yet to sign it. Obama’s speech was a condemnation of President Bush’s leadership in the war on terror. He said the focus on Iraq has left Americans in more danger than before Sept. 11, and that Bush has misrepresented the enemy as Iraqis who are fighting a civil war instead of the terrorists responsible for the attacks six years ago. “He confuses our mission,” Obama said, then he spread responsibility to lawmakers like Clinton who voted for the invasion. “By refusing to end the war in Iraq, President Bush is giving the terrorists what they really want, and what the Congress voted to give them in 2002: a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.” Obama said that as commander in chief he would remove troops from Iraq and putting them “on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan.” He said he would send at least two more brigades to Afghanistan and increase nonmilitary aid to the country by $1 billion. He also said he would create a three-year, $5 billion program to share intelligence with allies worldwide to take out terrorist networks from Indonesia to Africa.
Common sense, something completely devoid of the current administration, would tell you that we need troops in Pakistan. That said, Obama is the man. Love the guy.
Obama is so utterly clueless on foreign policy. When you get embarrassed by Hillaroid on the topic, you know you are weak. There is a reason we haven't gone into Pakistan, and that reason is that Musharraf's people would turn against him and we'd lose a critical intelligence ally in the war. It would also be a mission that would sustain heavy casualties, which you can bet your bottom dollar the Libs would jump all over. There is no substance to Obama. None. The sizzle sells the steak, but that Obama steak tastes like some poorly aged RUMP ROAST.
as opposed to our current strategy which has worked wonders. you're funny, when the "libpigs" criticze, you say they have no plan, when they have a plan, you claim you know more. I guess someone needs to look in the mirror about complaining.
Common sense mandates that you have actual knowledge of things going on, rather than just a hunch, before sending troops into a nation that we know has nuclear capability.
So you'd rather have intelligence that you can't use but allow the terrorists to roam free without restrictions and plot operations. You're concerned about heavy casualties fighting terrorists, but not while fighting non-terrorists in Iraq. Shows your true colors as a clueless terrorist supporter.
Which would be why he said: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
This just further illustrates how much Obama is in over his head. His eagerness to play tit-for-tat with Hillaroid has forced his hand here to say something dramatic to get some headlines. He's a babe in the foreign policy woods. Let's invade an ally! Great idea, Obama. How sad is one's candidacy when you are so incompetent, and I mean totally and utterly incompetent, that you make Hillaroid look like Kissinger on foreign policy? Won't be long before the Obama campaign goes t*** UP. Maybe he can go back on Oprah and get another ratings boost by canoodling with her and sounding articulate.
Wait a minute, you are saying Obama is in over his head, when we have George W Bush in the white house..... Probably the worst President in this countries HISTORY.....and you are saying another candidate is in over his head. That is rich. DD
People are looking for anything to get behind and a new face calling for something new seems will get people excited. obama can say a lot of things that sound good...but doesnt mean they are good or even possible.
So you apparently support the current leadership's plan which is to not go after the leadership responsible for 9/11. I will choose Obama's idea of going after them.
what a great speech. Not only that, it is nice for him to so clearly define his strategy to fight the terrorists. That is the kind of information that helps voters get to know candidates.
He needed a news event that would help bolster his credibility on foreign policy. Instead he gave us the 'invade Pakistan' headline. FLOP Perception is reality and the perception out there is that Obama is a total rookie on foreign policy, speaks without thinking, and speaks without considering what it would actually take to implement his recommendations. This issue will likely sink him.
You'll have to forgive roxran and tj. They're still light headed from giving Bush's nads a tongue bath, so they have a hard time comprehending a clear, sensible policy statement.
