Schrodinger's Dog
- 835
- 7
Ivan Seeking said:Raining McCain
by The McCain Girls
That's just not right!![]()
No that's wrong, in every sense of the word wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ivan Seeking said:Raining McCain
by The McCain Girls
That's just not right!![]()
All Things Considered, March 26, 2008 · Disavowing unilateralism, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) clarified his foreign policy views on Wednesday, promising, if elected, to consult and work more closely with allies overseas to resolve future conflicts than the Bush administration has done.
SANTA ANA, Calif. — Drawing a sharp distinction between himself and the two Democratic presidential candidates, Senator John McCain of Arizona warned Tuesday against vigorous government action to solve the deepening mortgage crisis and the market turmoil it has caused, saying that “it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”
Mr. McCain’s comments came a day after Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York called for direct federal intervention to help affected homeowners, including a $30 billion fund for states and communities to assist those at risk of foreclosure. Mrs. Clinton’s Democratic opponent, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, has similarly called for greater federal involvement, including creation of a $10 billion relief package to prevent foreclosures.
As the foreclosure crisis has rippled across the economy, it has thrust itself to the forefront of the presidential race, with Democrats seizing on the issue in urging forceful government steps to alleviate the crisis. Mr. McCain’s remarks Tuesday, to a group of Hispanic businessmen here, signaled a sharpening divide between the two parties’ candidates, with the senator warning against quick, costly government fixes to a crises rooted in the private sector.
“Rampant speculation” on both sides is the root cause of the crisis, Mr. McCain said. He placed part of the responsibility for the mortgage mess on lenders, who he said had grown “complacent” in a rising market and as a result acquired a “false sense of security” that caused them to “lower their lending standards.”
Possibly, but I am quite leery of him after learning that he believes that Iran is training al Qaeda terrorists. His lack of understanding of the political dynamics of the ME is quite disturbing. If he is elected, he will be responsible for cleaning up Bush's mess, and he hasn't been doing his homework. His much-vaunted foreign-policy credentials seem quite thin.Astronuc said:McCain is definitely an improvement over the current president.
Where did he say that?turbo-1 said:Possibly, but I am quite leery of him after learning that he believes that Iran is training al Qaeda terrorists. His lack of understanding of the political dynamics of the ME is quite disturbing.
Looks like bait... but I'll bite.mheslep said:Where did he say that?
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talk...tentGuid=ae522a49-6c82-4791-a76e-44ebb718bf32McCain said:As you know, there are al Qaeda operatives that are taken back into Iran, given training as leaders, and they’re moving back into Iraq.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/19/dems-seize-on-mccains-iran-gaffe/McCain said:[It's] common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate.
turbo-1 said:I don't think age is the problem, Ivan - it's ignorance. McCain repeated those untruths several times over the course of days. His grasp of the sociology and history of the Middle East is woefully inadequate. Furthermore, by painting Iran as the region's bad guys, he gives Bush and Cheney more cover for their wish to attack Iran. I really don't want McCain to succeed Bush, because I don't expect that his foreign policy will be an improvement.
I doubt either of them could be as ignorant as McCain has made himself look. But in general, I notice a weakness in global socio-political awareness. I remember one of the Democratic debates when Hillary was asked about Dmitry Medvedev, and while she got his name right, she really struggled to pronounce it. How can Americans be some ignorant about the most common Russian names? Hasn't anyone read Sun Tzu here?Schrodinger's Dog said:Is that a commonality amongst American politicians, or at least presidential candidates? I wonder? How are Clinton and Obama on history and sociology of the ME?
He has to be aware that an intentional spin on this would not get past the press.Could this be more spin, is he more aware than perhaps his comments let on? After all a significant proportion of Republican voters probably believe that Al-Qaeda are responsible for most of the violence in the ME, instead of a series of autonomous groups.
Gokul43201 said:I doubt either of them could be as ignorant as McCain has made himself look. But in general, I notice a weakness in global socio-political awareness. I remember one of the Democratic debates when Hillary was asked about Dmitry Medvedev, and while she got his name right, she really struggled to pronounce it. How can Americans be some ignorant about the most common Russian names? Hasn't anyone read Sun Tzu here?
He has to be aware that an intentional spin on this would not get past the press.
turbo-1 said:mheslep, it was all over the news during his ME trip. I thought that everybody had heard these gaffes by now. At one point, Lieberman stepped into correct him, but that certainly should not have been necessary. ...
Yes, ok as you say a gaffe. Its certainly not something 'he believes'."I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al Qaeda. I am sorry," the Arizona senator said.
There's very good arguments that AQI was the primer cord that ignited much of the other violence e.g. the golden dome attack. Whether or not AQI gets the credit is arguable; there's no question it was there intention.Gokul43201 said:...when any reasonably well-informed person knows that AQI is responsible for only a tiny fraction of the violence.
mheslep said:There's very good arguments that AQI was the primer cord that ignited much of the other violence e.g. the golden dome attack. Whether or not AQI gets the credit is arguable; there's no question it was there intention.
Unfortunately, it appears that he did believe it, as he repeated it several times in different settings over a period of days. He said that it is "common knowledge". Who in their right mind would believe that Iranian Shiite mullahs would train Sunni militants, then ship them back to Iraq to kill Shiites? That is absolutely ridiculous, and it points to a fundamental ignorance about the political/military dynamics in that area of the world. You'd think that a presidential candidate would take great pains to be educated/briefed on at least the fundamentals, seeing that we have troops trying to ride herd on a civil war between these two groups.mheslep said:Yes, ok as you say a gaffe. Its certainly not something 'he believes'.
Actually there are very poor arguements that AQI (Musab al-Zarqawi's group) is the primer cord. The insurgency began in June '83 with Bremer's order to dismiss and disband the Iraqi army. They had no money and no possibilities - except to fight the occupying foreign forces. This has been well documented and the Bush administration still denies it.mheslep said:There's very good arguments that AQI was the primer cord that ignited much of the other violence e.g. the golden dome attack. Whether or not AQI gets the credit is arguable; there's no question it was there intention.
I don't know what belief has to do with anything here. But McCain claiming he misspoke about Iran-al Qaeda carries about as much conviction as Clinton claiming she misspoke about Bosnia. You can slip up once, but you can't slip up twice or thrice about the same thing and call it a "slip up". Only difference between Clinton and McCain: Clinton knew she was wrong!mheslep said:Yes, ok as you say a gaffe. Its certainly not something 'he believes'.
Clinton knew she was flat-out lying! At least McCain can take shelter under ignorance rather than mendacity, if he would like to come off as stupid instead of dishonest.Gokul43201 said:Only difference between Clinton and McCain: Clinton knew she was wrong!
Yes 'primer' is poor choice, I didn't mean AQI started the early insurgency, but that his group was responsible for a huge up swing in the violence. W/ regards to alignment in '04, that is incorrect per this and numerous other sources.Astronuc said:Actually there are very poor arguements that AQI (Musab al-Zarqawi's group) is the primer cord. The insurgency began in June '83 with Bremer's order to dismiss and disband the Iraqi army. They had no money and no possibilities - except to fight the occupying foreign forces. This has been well documented and the Bush administration still denies it.
al Zarqawi's group became aligned with bin Laden's al Qaida in late 2004, about 16 months after the insurgency began.
...
February 22, 2006: Armed gunmen affiliated with al-Zarqawi’s group blow up the Golden Mosque in Samarra, a sacred site to Iraq Shi’a. The attack sets off days of intense sectarian violence across Iraq.
...
April 2002: Al-Zarqawi leaves Iran and enters Iraq.
December 2001: Following the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, al-Zarqawi flees to Iran.
2000: Al-Zarqawi sets up an Al-Qaeda training camp near the western Afghan city of Herat.
1999: Al-Zarqawi is freed from jail under amnesty granted by Jordanian King Abdullah shortly after he took office. Al-Zarqawi travels via Pakistan to Afghanistan, where he joins up with Al-Qaeda.
I don't see anything that clearly falsifies what Astro was saying, but if anything, the phrase "joins up with al Qaeda" is misleading.mheslep said:Yes 'primer' is poor choice, I didn't mean AQI started the early insurgency, but that his group was responsible for a huge up swing in the violence. W/ regards to alignment in '04, that's false.
http://www.eagleworldnews.com/2006/06/10/iraq-a-timeline-of-abu-musab-al-zarqawi/
Well Hillary, at the very least, has proven herself to be quite ignorant of the events of her own life!Gokul43201 said:I doubt either of them could be as ignorant as McCain has made himself look.
Hillary for VP! (on the GOP ticket) She's damaging the Democratic party's chances in the general election by doing her best to make Obama look unelectable. If she hijacks the superdelegates and pulls off a Dem nomination, look for mass defections to McCain and four more years of an expensive and futile war that is wrecking our all-volunteer military.Ivan Seeking said:Yes, McCain was confused and Hillary was lying. Combine the two and we get Bush!