alwaysLearning
You are right in pointing out that attacking another country is a blatant breach of UN chartered law for the respect of other nation's soverignity.
I think they don't understand the situation in FATA afghan/Pakistan border. They will create a disastrous situation soon. Already skirmishes are happening between US and Pakistani forces on the border. When some US troops will die then that will give them reason to launch an attack on Pakistan. Which can be avoided if US can abstain from attacking another sovereign nation especially their "so called" ally on war on terror.
I think preemptive strike is something which is a new paradigm we have to live with. Kill the sucker first and ask questions later. Typical American way to solve delicate matters.
I don't think there is much of a difference between the two candidates and I seriously doubt president can do much in US. It is all a hog wash to keep the sheeple happy and think that their voices matter.
The only candidate who make any sense at all is Ron Paul IMHO.
The whole world is disturbed - - that is why this election is critical (economically too) to us all.
You are right about bin Laden being a relatively minor player now.
As Obama said... Al Qaeda is in fifty countries...
But you have to agree with Obama's stance on negotiation and not ignoring adversaries, having merit of resolution rather than inflammation.
Maybe having nuclear weapons might be the US's wild card and saviour.
I wondered if terrorists listening to the debate would chuckle as they plan an imminent attack with their suitcases!
I watched most of the debate, trying to be quite objective. I thought they both had their moments of strength, but McCain did tend to waffle, particularly when attempting to score a point in referring to his past experience. Given the chaos over which his Party reigns right now, I'm not sure that doing that would have worked for him.
Obama came across to me as measured in his responses and definitely better on economic issues.
One thing I did notice was that when the moderator continually asked the two candidates to address their remarks to each other, Obama did do this, and referred to McCain as 'John', while McCain clearly had difficulty in dropping his more aggressive stance towards Obama, continued to address the moderator and maintained the "Senator Obama". It may be quite unimportant, but it reinforced for me Obama's apparent willingness to engage verbally with an opponent, something which perhaps can be extrapolated to his approach to difficult negotiations with other countries.
I'm very nervous that Mr McCain would regard war as a first option, apparently rejecting any suggestion of discussions with Iran and/or North Korea.
I think that Obama's stance on engagement with some of these 'bad countries' is a good idea but the whole thing is spin anyway. I mean, there is an economic or vested interest in everything that the USA or any other country like Iran do. The 'negotiation' aspect is good and feel good on the surface but I don't know that it would accomplish much.
Yeah it is important for the new president to fix things and make the USA a good country with a good reputation. My fear is that neither candidate can pull it off because they aren't ultimately in control of their country anyway. These days I just see the president of a country or prime minister as a PR guy for their country.
Damn I have become cynical these days
One thing stood out to me was that the USA owes China $500 Billion. Could be more. If this debate was translated into Chinese and the average person just found that out, linked with the calamity of Wall Street, the level of resentment towards the USA is mounting.
War with Russia could be a different story these days. With the oil they have and money from resources they could well have increased the strength of the army and facilities - straight out war could leave the USA on the crushed end of the stick. Never under estimate anything - that is a human flaw.
They need a leader who is calm under the most trying of times and a well spoken, dignified speaker who can negotiate.
What you see is what you get with Obama.
He argued logically and inclusively in his speech in Germany.
He was open and honest when he said they needed Europe's help in Afghanistan to save them money they needed for their economy. He provoked and promoted a willingness to 'work together'. The world wants Obama!
The way he has run his campaign screams of the PR he will have as president. From the start he insisted on the integrity of his aides and campaign members and simply stated that this and congenial relations amongst them was the only mode acceptable if they wished to remain involved.
Disagree, but be agreeable. This debate reflects he practices this trait.
Obama will not be a lame duck president. He will be the commander as he is with his campaign.
AlwaysL,That's a very disturbing video
If anyone is interested, those odds have BOTH tightened2 more days down the road :-
Now
Obama on ..... 1/2 ($1.50).. in from ($1.62)... steady from ($1.62).... in from ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
McCain now 39/20 ($2.95).. out from ($2.75) ... out from ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)
If anyone is interested, those odds have BOTH tightened
Obama now 4/9 = $1.44
McCain now 7/4 = $2.75
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
Guess, based on that, you'd call the debate a draw ... EXCEPT that foreign policy was supposed to be McCain's big strength - and he was supposed to win that one 'easily' (the next debate more on the economy) ...
AlwaysL,
here's McCain's response... "fooling around with vets"
I personally wouldn't trust the man with negotiating anything trickier than an under 8 footy match
PS as for your nicname, - gotta be a great motto in life lol - thanks.
Tonight was a breakthrough for Senator Obama, who showed himself truly ready to be president. He responded knowledgeably, thoughtfully and confidently to the toughest questions on the economy, Iraq, and terror.
Meanwhile, Senator McCain spent so much time attacking his opponent, he neglected to show how a McCain-Palin administration would differ from Bush-Cheney. As a result, Obama answered the threshold question about his candidacy; McCain did not.
Those predisposed to voting for either candidate would do so regardless of how well they did. I personally am voting for Obama because I feel he has the best temperament for leadership.
Obama exhibits the personality traits I acquit with great leaders: the profound ability to *listen* to the point of view of everyone--even one's opponent; an innate dignity which isn't self-serving or coming from an assumption of entitlement; a graceful self-confidence; a complete acceptance of responsibility; patience in the face of insult; above all, the inward quiet of a man who, while focused on the goal, has the intellect to consider he might be wrong about a given situation.
A bogger:Barack Obama was crisp, reassuring and strong -- in short, presidential, as he has been throughout the financial storm of the past two weeks. McCain was not as bad as he has been recently; but much of this debate was fought on what was supposed to be his high ground. As the encounter ended, Obama not only controlled the commanding heights of the economic issue -- and he not only held his own on national security -- but clearly passed the threshold as a credible commander-in-chief. McCain kept repeating that Obama doesn't "understand." But he clearly did. McCain made up no ground. That's similar to what happened in 1960 when Nixon ran on the slogan "Experience Counts" but found it didn't count that much when voters decided JFK was up to the job after the side by side comparison they saw in the first debate.
I agree with your article. Obama held own regarding National Security. Especially, when he mentioned the peace keepers in Georgia was Russian and that may be a problem! He was right! McCain did do better than I expected - but my expectations weren't high. Obama came out on top because he showed he is not "ready to lead" but is already a Leader. McCain consistently failed to answer the fundamental question and resorted too often to talking points. Obama had clear, concise answers that proved his ability to both lead and inspire this country back to greatness. My only real disappointment was that when McCain brought up his support of veterans, Obama didn't go after him. McCain has an abysmal record in this area and Obama shouldn't have let him get away with claiming otherwise.
It was a good night for Obama because, when 83 percent of the country believe we are on the wrong track, standing toe-to-toe with McCain on foreign policy is all you need to do. And Obama clearly did that -- scoring strong points on the lessons of Iraq, where he pointed out all the ways McCain had been wrong on the war. He even landed a zinger: "John, you like to pretend the war began in 2007."
It was a good night for McCain because, after a week in which he'd been bleeding like a hemophiliac in a barbed wire factory, tonight stanched the bleeding. He was able to keep the debate about the economy focused on taxes and cutting spending, as opposed to the crisis brought on by the free market, deregulation religion of which he is a devout follower. And he was able to interject himself into the major foreign policy decisions of the last 20 years.
But it was a bad night for reality. Did John McCain really try to reclaim the high ground on torture after having caved on the issue earlier in the year? And did he really profess his love for veterans after having fought against the new GI Bill?
I was so angry at Lehr. Obama was about to nail McCain on using Arizona as a depository for radioactive waste from all the nuclear power plants McCain wants to build and Lehr shut him down.
Lol, not from where I was sitting ...I missed the debate, it was a draw, was it?
Afghanistan is not the issue Russia's rise is a much bigger deal a vote for McCain is a vote for president Palin who is not an experienced steady hand
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
Madeleine Albright:
A blogger:
Robert Shrum: CNN
A bogger:
Arianna Huffington:
Blogger:
Wow Doris - you picked some very unbiased sources there - LOL
Our side is totally unanimous that McCain won the debate. Not even close.
McCain is going to win because in the end, he is the safe choice. Obama is too unknown and risky to Americans.
Just a warning to you, don't get too invested in our election. You are going to be disappointed in the end. America generally goes for the safe choice in times of war or crisis. McCain is moderate enough, and experienced enough to fit the bill.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?