Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

George Bush Foreign Policy 101 vs. National Security 101

March 19, 2008 7:52 PM

Clearly, some Democrats are hoping to make hay out of McCain's gaffe (see "Err Jordan" below).

And clearly, Republicans are hoping to paint Obama as quite naïve on foreign policy.

So, here then, a possible preview of the general election.

Today Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., alter-ego Mark Salter said:

"Sen. Obama (D-Ill.) says that ending the war will not be easy, that 'there will be dangers involved.' Yet, in that patented way of his, he declines to name those dangers.

"Let me enumerate a few: Al Qaeda, which is now on the run, will survive, claim victory and continue to provoke sectarian tensions that, while they have been subdued by the 'tactics' of the surge, still exist and are ripe for provocation by al Qaeda, which would almost certainly ignite, again, civil war in Iraq, a civil war that could easily descend into genocide. To say that invading Iraq was used as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda is one thing. To pretend that our defeat there won't provide an even bigger one is foolish supposition.

"Iran, which trains Shia extremists and is known to arm and equip Sunni extremists, a fact Sen. Obama is apparently unaware of, will also view our premature withdrawal as a victory, as will other countries in the region. And the biggest state supporter of terrorists, a country with nuclear ambitions and a stated desire to destroy the State of Israel, will see its influence in the Middle East grow significantly.

"These are some of the 'dangers' that our premature withdrawal from Iraq will engender, and they all have the potential to destabilize the entire region. A realistic plan to prevent them from occurring is what people with experience in statecraft call 'strategy,' something Sen. Obama has not offered yet.

"Sen. Obama, as has also become a habit of his 'new politics,' mischaracterizes John McCain's position by saying McCain did not want to reduce troops because the violence in Iraq was too high, and now does not wish to do so because the violence in down. The reason violence is down is because Gen. Petraeus' counterinsurgency is, which, even Sen. Obama recognizes, is succeeding. Those 'tactics' are advancing our 'strategy.' Deprive Gen. Petraeus of the resources and manpower to employ those tactics, or worse, leave Iraq altogether, and our strategy will collapse.

"That is National Security 101. John McCain wants American forces to come home when our clear and serious interests at stake in Iraq, which nearly 4,000 Americans have given their lives to secure, are truly safe, when al Qaeda is defeated; Iran's influence is contained, and the potential for a truly cataclysmic civil war in Iraq is remote. That, I think, is what is called 'making us safer.' Sen. Obama's plan, if it can be charitably described as one, would do the reverse."

Obama spox Bill Burton responded with this dis:

“We wish the McCain campaign well as they try to figure out the difference between Iran and al Qaeda. Yesterday, Sen. McCain said that Iran is 'taking al Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back' to Iraq. This was shortly after telling talk radio host Hugh Hewitt, '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.' Or does Sen. McCain believe the clarification that he issued yesterday, 'I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al Qaeda." Or does he believe the statement that he issued today: 'Al Qaeda and Shia extremists -- with support from external powers such as Iran -- are on the run, but not defeated.' Huh?

“Does this sound familiar?  Back in February 2003, before the war in Iraq began, there was no operational connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. But John McCain was saying that we had to invade and occupy a country that had no ties to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks because of Iraq's, 'support for the international terrorism of al Qaeda.'

"Despite all of his Washington experience, John McCain voted for, supported, and continues to support the greatest strategic blunder in American foreign policy in decades. Osama bin Laden, and the core leadership of al Qaeda responsible for the 9/11 attacks, are not in Iraq. They are reportedly in northwest Pakistan, which is over 1,000 miles from Iraq.

"So, while John McCain likes to boast of his willingness to follow Osama bin Laden to the Gates of Hell, all he has done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq while Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda have regrouped, and the Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan.

“This fall, John McCain will support George Bush Foreign Policy 101: endless war in Iraq; a policy of not talking to adversaries that has not worked; and a disturbing tendency to conflate very different threats. Barack Obama will offer a clean break from the failed policies of the past. He will end the war in Iraq, finish the job in Afghanistan, and focus on the threats of the 21st century."

Obama saying McCain teaches George Bush Foreign Policy 101 ... McCain saying Obama needs to take National Security 101 ... the 2008 election in a nutshell. (Perhaps.)

- jpt

March 19, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (33)

User Comments

Actually, Iran training Al Qaeda HAS been widely reported in the news. He meant to say extremists, but his original statement was accurate too. Look at the 9-11 Commission Report, page 61 or The New York Sun 11/14/06, or USA Today 4/11/07, The Guardian 5/22/07, and on and on. Funny how no one seemed to notice when Obama at a town hall meeting at Newman Smith High School in Texas said we should stop buying oil from countries like Iran. Nice. We haven't bought oil from Iran since Carter was President.

Posted by: Jared | Mar 20, 2008 7:16:24 PM

The big O knows he is in trouble. his attack on McCain is an attempt to divert attention from the Wright massacre and his drop in the polls.

Posted by: TheShadowKnows | Mar 20, 2008 5:11:57 PM

spock,
try at least to get the facts straight.

Obama DID go to Iraq, in 2006. Picture-google "Obama visits Iraq" and you will find a picture of him posing with troops in Iraq.

Posted by: Niels | Mar 20, 2008 12:14:37 PM

You libs attacking McCain for mis-speaking which everyone has done, and defending Obama with his purposely racist rhetoric. Got to love it, you can not make this stuff up.

Oh by the way Obama never went to Iraq, and from 2003-2006 supported the WAR and said that the people on the ground not the congress should decide on strategy (June 2006)

He only change his position after the media pushed people to change their opinions!

Obama is full of double talk that would make Kerry blush!

He has yet to answer why he made a racist his mentor, since mentor are people you agree with 100% of the time.

I got to say though anyone not brainwashed by the libs are definitely seeing where the racism resides from!

Posted by: spock | Mar 20, 2008 11:41:12 AM

McCain misspoke and referred to Al Quaeda when he meant extremists, then corrected himself. Like the cheap shot artists Romney and Rove, Obama couldn`t resist and implied that this mistake on McCain`s part indicates that he somehow therefore has better foreign affairs credetials than Mac. Pathetic.

Posted by: luke | Mar 20, 2008 10:35:53 AM

Most have missed the key phrase in this statement by the equally hot-headed, McCain Chief of Staff, Salter. He states, "McCain wants American forces to come home when our CLEAR AND SERIOUS INTERESTS at stake in Iraq, which nearly 4,000 Americans, have given their lives to secure, are truly safe." I think Americans are due an explanation of just what our CLEAR AND SERIOUS INTERESTS may be, other than putting out the brush fire, started by Bush on false premises, before it becomes a forest fire. It has become all too clear the original intent of pursuing an enemy of America into Iraq at the cost of nearly 4,000 American lives, untold thousands of innocent Iraqi civilian lives, destruction of a foreign nations infrastructure, and billions of American IOU's; nor forcing democracy upon a people who we knew not whether they wanted democracy or not, was not the intent of the invader, but rather the salvation of a legacy for a father and the securing of interests of corporate oligarchs. Just how we are going to extricate ourselves from such a pending inferno without further untold devastation, is going to require a tremendous undertaking by a leader with the ability and level headed intelligence to bring all factions together to find a solution. I for one don't believe one who is on record advocating the reckless invasion of another nation to the tune of a Beach Boys song, is the right one to define America's true intent, nor extricate America from further destruction.

Posted by: GC | Mar 20, 2008 10:25:33 AM

I find it interesting that when a Demo Candidate makes a slight gaffe, the MSM says he/she is tired, its been a long campaign, etc. I find it striking that Sen Obama has never bothered to visit the Troops overseas. If he is elected, one of the first things he will do is institute the Draft. He feels that all of the young Americans should serve our Country, in some way. Its a long way to November, an my guess there will be more "gotcha" moments.

Posted by: homjett | Mar 20, 2008 10:17:53 AM

The Dem National Committee will never choose Obama because he has shown the world that he suffers from knee-jerk reactions, poor judgement, lack of planning (he should have dumped Wright way before the campaign started) and a total lack of experience and knowledge.
Face it. Obama barely meets the criteria to be the JUNIOR SENATOR he currently is.

Posted by: Sal | Mar 20, 2008 9:37:21 AM

"A Rasmussen survey taken from March 14-16 of 1,200 likely voters showed 56 percent of those interviewed were less likely to vote for Obama because of the Wright’s sermons."

Posted by: Adam, Texas | Mar 20, 2008 9:34:47 AM

Obama is a has-been, loser and was never qualified to run in the first place. Quit now, Mr. B. Hussein Obama. You are not going to make history by being the first black President. The only black qualified for that is Colin Powell, and it's a shame he won't run for office. So without Powell, McCain is the next best choice.
McCain will kick Obama's butt when it comes to knowledge of foreign affairs, security, military issues, economy and
taxes.

Posted by: Mike | Mar 20, 2008 9:20:08 AM

I heard someone say "Quarar would be a good choice for President. In analyzing the remark, I find they were right, I'm voting for Quarar,


Quarar

Posted by: jbgallo2 | Mar 20, 2008 9:15:27 AM

Where is the "victory" in continuing an illegal occupation of a foreign country...Iraq? Is it victory when you have stomped into the ground any and all who resist us as INVADERS? I promise you that most of the gun fire on US troops is NOT coming from ben Ladin or Al Qaeda! It is coming from Iraqi young people trying to rid ***their homeland*** from foreign invaders...the US.

I believe that our young people would do the same to free America from foreign invaders...our young men would fight to the death! These Iraqi boys are no different! Our government lies and says these young men who are defending their homeland are terrorists. There *are* terrorist in Iraq...thanks the the US presence there...but most of the opposition to the US is local and totally understandable.

You are a fool if you think ben Ladin and Iraq young men are in cahoots. This is just US propaganda to allow us to "stomp into the ground any and all who resist us"

Please don't lie to our young men in uniform and tell them they are protecting American Freedoms while they do the bidding of our genocidal maniac pres. and his war profits cartel. There is NOTHING going on in Iraq that affects any of our liberties except this... Our government has used the war as an excuse to diminish our rights!

STOP THE LIES!!! It is CRIMINAL to tell our young people to die for a lie.

Posted by: Xrucifer | Mar 20, 2008 8:34:41 AM

I think Obama should come out and lead our foreign policy debate. He has been out of the USA four times in his life, agrees with his long-time advisor on "foreign" policy, re: "God damn America", and has all kinds of other experience to offer. (?)

He can solve the Iraq problem in his first 30 days as president by bringing our troops out, isolating the USA and turning everything else over to the UN. Peace will reign in the Middle-East and our vital oil supplies will be preserved.

Posted by: doofus | Mar 20, 2008 8:22:16 AM

Apparently, McCains Iraq strategy is to undo the war. Mark Salter says it all in this quote:

"John McCain wants American forces to come home when (...) al Qaeda is defeated; Iran's influence is contained, and the potential for a truly cataclysmic civil war in Iraq is remote. That, I think, is what is called 'making us safer."'

Well, before the war there was no al Qaeda in Iraq, no Iranian influence and no civil war.

What a smooth way of admitting the war was wrong and a million lives wasted for nothing, without actually saying it...

So much for the Straight Talk Express.

Posted by: Niels | Mar 20, 2008 7:49:38 AM

John McCain is starting to remind of Ronald Reagan just before it was revealed that he had alzheimers. This is most unfortunate for him and I am wondering how the republicans are going to handle this--They have a candidate who has suffered and bled for this country, but who cannot keep our enemies straight. Now that I think of it-- he is sort of like Bush too--Afghanistan is the enemy...no Iraq is the enemy...no Iran is the enemy---Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran--McCain said that. Bring back the draft and send all of our young people to die for oil (after all my son/daughter won't have to go I'll make sure of that). Is this going to be the new battle cry for republicans?

Posted by: DQuinn | Mar 20, 2008 6:37:07 AM

Re: Err Jordan

That's trademark Karl Rove - didn't Bush's 'brain' come up with the phony Iraq/AlQaeda connection to justify invading Iraq?

And now Rove is apparently advising McDork - I think he's persuaded him to keep trying to foster an Iran/AlQaeda connection to insulate himself from criticisms of 'bomb bomb Iran'.

Rove's so creepy! Ewww . . .

Posted by: SamTheCat | Mar 20, 2008 3:48:15 AM

For all those who think Obama is the wrong choice:

Posted by: Melanie | Mar 20, 2008 2:19:23 AM

McCain has shown the world how republicans think. To them, all of those camel jockies are the same. They can't tell the difference between Iran and Al qaeda..even though Shia and Sunni Muslims hate eachother..he somehow thinks they train eachother ?
Obama is right. Iraq was a distraction from the real enemy which is al qaeda and Osama Bin Ladin. Bush was shown on tv saying he didn't care about Osama Bin Ladin after we failed to find him...that right there proved how he is not a man of his word when he said we'd hunt down whoever did this.

Posted by: Paul | Mar 20, 2008 2:01:42 AM

Calling Al Gore. Calling Al Gore.

Please stand up and endorse a Democratic candidate. You are a leader who, like Obama, is not afraid to take risks for the good of the country. Please do so soon, so the Democrats can get focussed on the November contest.

Posted by: Mike Denhof | Mar 20, 2008 1:00:42 AM

Wendy is right. McCain corrected himself after Lieberman stepped in. Not the press. Not Obama. McCain. He messed up. I admire John McCain - it's hard not to admire somebody who refused to leave a prisoner of war camp because he was priviledged.

It's the fawning, supplicant press that I've got a problem with - the same fawning, supplicant guys who were too chummy with Bush to ask any hard questions five years ago, when he led us into war or to treat Bush or McCain the way they would treat any other politician. They are as responsible for this wretched war as Bush and the impotent congress that voted for it.

What do we get on the 5th anniversary of the Iraq war? Mrs. Clinton's datebook. It's time for the press to stop laughing when McCain sings "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran." It's time for the press to ask what McCain's plan for Iraq is. It is time to ask how much money we are going to have to borrow from the Chinese to support McCain's war. It's time to even find out who is on John McCain's foreign policy team. If the same fools are on the McCain team as the Bush team, I deserve to know that as an American voter.

Maybe you don't get as many hits when you write about real issues as when you fuel racism or write about call girls. But I'll say it again. If we had had the press we have now in 1945 - none of you would have had the courage or moral compass to walk into Buchenwald and write the truth. When are you guys going to stop trying to be Matt Drudge and start taking responsibilty for the impact you have on human lives? When are you going to understand that the blood of the wars of this generation is on your hands?

Posted by: Mara | Mar 19, 2008 10:22:04 PM

Remind me---why does anyone believe that Obama is going to change politics? His tendency to mock Clinton and Mcain is arrogant and irritating. More important--he presents this election as a choice between the future and the past, but oddly--he talks about the past more than any other candidate. Specifically, his speech about the war in 2002. Time to move on! I guess you work with what you have and this is all he has...

Great piece contrasting his rhetoric with the apparently more candid assessment of his possition by his then senior foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power. The Obama campaign really is amature hour.

Posted by: Nancy | Mar 19, 2008 10:06:21 PM

NOT A SINGLE DOUBT THAT IRAN AND AL-QEADA WILL DANCE IN THE STREETS IF OBAMA IS ELECTED. HIS CUT AND RUN,APPEASEMENT AND RETREAT POLICIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST ARE EXCATLY WHAT THEY WANT US TO DO. LIKE JIMMY CARTER..OBAMA IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHY RUSSIA'S LENIN WROTE LONG AGO THAT "WESTERN SOCIALISTS WERE HIS USEFUL IDIOTS"

Posted by: johnE | Mar 19, 2008 9:55:00 PM

if Mccain wins on 08 election, i would go to canada on a 4 years vaccation.

Posted by: david | Mar 19, 2008 9:38:22 PM

If that is what McCain meant, Mr. Salter, then why did he correct his comments on the spot when Lieberman whispered into his ear?

Because he doesn't know what he is talking about. These factions are all the same to him. He does not have a conceptual framework for understanding what is going on in Iraq.

Posted by: Wendy | Mar 19, 2008 9:16:25 PM

I don't think bashing the democratic candidates is a good idea. The GOP just loves that. The FACT is that either Clinton or Obama would be so much better than Bush/Cheney have been. McCain would also be better than Bush but do we really want a 72 year old guy who has an ax to grind with foreign countries running our country. I think Obama is best suited to pull this country together and start to repair the damage the bushies have caused. Obama 2008!

Posted by: pt | Mar 19, 2008 8:54:28 PM

I support John Murtha's (super delegate) recent endorsement.
The info. above shows how ill prepared Obama is to be president. Murthas endorsement is huge.

We do not need another president who needs on-the-job-training coupled with a pattern of POOR judgement. Serious issues on the table that require serious, experienced leadership

Hillary '08

Posted by: catherine in nm | Mar 19, 2008 8:48:51 PM

yea ok D, THAT makes a LOT of sense. you know, b/c i guess obama's riding hillary's coattails by winning more states, more of the popular vote, AND more elected delegates.

and i guess using your empty "first lady" records under the CLINTON presidency while exaggerating or as in the case of NAFTA, falsely stating, your "experience" is somehow not riding coattails.

LOL...

Posted by: justin | Mar 19, 2008 8:45:00 PM

Obama knows nothing about foreign policy. He could have helped with the escalating Afghanistan situation but chose to have NO meetings on his committee because he was campaigning for President. Clinton has detailed plans to remove our troops and has over 30 generals/flag officers endorsing her that trust her plans. Hillary has been to Iraq 3 times as a Senator. Obama - once. Hey - by the way - Hillary release 12000 pages of First Lady records. What about Obama's records as an IL Senator? What is he trying to hide? And Thanks Obama for the revote. You really made a lot of FL & MI voters mad.

Posted by: Jenny | Mar 19, 2008 8:39:38 PM

I don't think this country can survive another bush-league type president like McCain. We need a new direction to get this country out of the mess caused by this administration over the last 7 years. Obama 2008!

Posted by: pt | Mar 19, 2008 8:37:46 PM

actually he probably has his people find out how Hillary would answer and then followed her lead. He rides her coat tails.

Posted by: D | Mar 19, 2008 8:24:52 PM

I am sure Obama had to talk to his people or have his people talk to the media cause he is retarded when it comes to foriegn policy.

Posted by: D | Mar 19, 2008 8:19:57 PM

I am sure Obama had to talk to his people or have his people talk to the media cause he is retarded when it comes to foriegn policy.

Posted by: D | Mar 19, 2008 8:19:48 PM

Another George Bush for America. Please send educated and smart people to the white house. We cannot afford another example of GB.

Posted by: Demo 08 | Mar 19, 2008 8:17:37 PM

Post a comment