Read this carefully:
WASHINGTON — If Senator Clinton can best Senator Obama in today's round of primaries and caucuses and go on to capture the White House, a co-author of the surge strategy in Iraq says he is convinced she would hold off on authorizing a large-scale immediate withdrawal of American soldiers from Iraq.Emphasis mine. Does the Obama campaign really want the Clinton team to explain why she would listen to a man who by all accounts was instrumental in turning a decidedly unwinnable position into what by all accounts has been a strategy that set the new standard in counter-insurgency? Why wouldn't she? This view shows that Obama is the candidate who will never protect Americas interests--Carter without the accent.
In a weekend interview, a retired four-star general, Jack Keane, said that when he briefed Mrs. Clinton in late 2006 and January 2007 on the counteroffensive strategy known as the surge, she "generally supported the surge strategy in the sense she wanted it to succeed but she was skeptical about its chances."
The Obama campaign yesterday seized on the general's comments after they appeared in an article on The New York Sun's Web site, with the chief spokesman, William Burton, issuing a statement saying: "Senator Clinton needs to explain to the American people what she said to the architect of George Bush's surge that made him think she wouldn't end the war."
Obama is hoping he can get by without any military action by just ignoring the problem like Bill Clinton did throughout the nineties. That luxury is now longer available as al-Qaeda is still probing for soft spots and waiting to strike. Hillary understands that and she understands the importance of winning in Iraq for the long term. She could never say that now of course because the liberals would get incensed but Hillary has a better grasp on long-term military strategy than does Obama. With quotes like this coming out if the campaign, it shows that he's barely qualified to be a Senator let alone the Commander in Chief.
John McCain just got himself some campaign ammo.
Posts
2 comments:
what he said is true, unless we are and imperialistic colnizing nation (which i pray we are not) The East India company was in the 1600s. All i can say is that the surge is not working
The only ones who don't see successes in the surge are those who have a vested interest in our losing. You would fit into that category my friend.
The colonizing argument is so 2003-2004, it's probably a good time to update it.
Post a Comment