Today's Article
Senator McCain
revealed a shocking
lack of knowledge
about our real
enemy on Tuesday.
revealed a shocking
lack of knowledge
about our real
enemy on Tuesday.
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
McCain Reveals Stunning Lack Of Knowledge On Al-Qaeda
By Cliff Montgomery - Mar. 19th, 2008
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D-IL) criticized presumed Republican presidential nominee
John McCain (R-AZ) on Wednesday for confusing Iraqi extremists. Obama added that five years after the start
of the war on Iraq, McCain still fails to understand that our fruitless nation-building of that country has only
made enemies in that region.
The Illinois senator accused both McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), his Democratic opponent, of
maintaining stances on Iraq which represent the conventional, false reasoning which has permeated
Washington for the last several years. Senators McCain and Clinton voted for the 2002 resolution which
allowed Bush to send U.S. troops to Iraq. Bush invaded the country in March 2003.
Phil Singer, Clinton's campaign spokesman, spun that Obama took "practically no action to end the war until
he started his White House run while Senator Clinton has been a consistent critic of Iraq for many years."
And a McCain spokesman claimed Obama pushes a risky U.S. troop pullout from Iraq which may allow the
country to slide into genocide and civil war.
Both camps are lying.
The only consistency which Sen. Clinton has showed on Iraq has been her inconsistency. First she voted to go
into Iraq, then only began to pose as an opponent the moment it started to turn especially ugly.
A person who cannot be honest about her own changing position on a subject is a poor witness for someone
else's stance on the topic, Sen. Clinton.
And McCain's position? It's a little late to worry about the breakout of civil war and genocide in Iraq. Things
which already have happened cannot be kept from happening, Sen. McCain. And continuing a war of your own
in an already war-torn nation tearing itself apart through civil strife and mutual hatred doesn't help--it only
creates more animosity, and makes matters that much worse.
If Iraq does need outside help, it can only come from forces trained to keep the peace, not those drilled for
war. Claiming that even more war will somehow bring peace to an imploding nation is like claiming that only
more crime will bring order to a crime-filled neighborhood.
McCain, who loves claiming that his experience in national security makes him the top presidential choice,
revealed a shocking lack of knowledge on Iraq and the Middle East on Tuesday.
On a tour of Europe and the Middle East meant to underpin those national security credentials, the apparent
GOP nominee got confused when discussing with reporters just which Islamist group in Iraq is supposed to be
working with neighboring Iran.
During a news photo-op in Amman, Jordan, McCain wrongly proclaimed that Shi'ite Iran is a supporter of the
small Sunni group al-Qaeda in Iraq. A colleague soon corrected his gaffe.
The group al-Qaeda in Iraq is "a mostly homegrown, though foreign-led, Sunni-based insurgency. Experts
question how closely--or even whether--the group is connected to the international al-Qaeda network,"
according to a recent AP story.
Obama was quick to pounce on McCain's obvious lack of knowledge.
"Just yesterday, we heard Senator McCain confuse Sunni and Shi'ite, Iran and al Qaeda," Obama stated.
"Maybe that is why he voted to go to war with a country that had no al Qaeda ties. Maybe that is why he
completely fails to understand that the war in Iraq has done more to embolden America's enemies than any
strategic choice that we have made in decades," he added.
McCain is continuing Bush's sophistical trick of the Complex Question or Compound Argument on Iraq--he
simply combines two completely unrelated things, and then insists that they are the same thing. To Bush,
McCain, and other neo-conservatives, Iraq is al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda is Iraq.
They're not close to being the same thing. Al-Qaeda was not even in Iraq until we invaded that nation for no
good reason--they didn't make Iraq a center in the war of terror, George W. Bush and his rabid followers did
that.
Now, it's possible al-Qaeda has a handful of terror cells in Iraq. But they surely have terror cells in practically
every other country in the Middle East.
They also have terror cells in New Zealand. And in Germany. And in Spain. They in fact have terror cells in more
than 170 different countries around the globe.
Al-Qaeda is a worldwide terror network, based not in Iraq, but in Afghanistan--particularly along the hilly Afghan-
Pakistani border.
Obama seemed to point out this fact as well, mocking McCain's vow to chase Osama bin Laden to "the gates
of hell" if elected. If that's so, Obama retorted, then America must re-focus its war effort on Afghanistan rather
than Iraq.
"We have a security gap when candidates say they will follow Osama bin Laden to 'the gates of hell,' but refuse
to follow him where he actually goes," declared Obama.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
By Cliff Montgomery - Mar. 19th, 2008
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D-IL) criticized presumed Republican presidential nominee
John McCain (R-AZ) on Wednesday for confusing Iraqi extremists. Obama added that five years after the start
of the war on Iraq, McCain still fails to understand that our fruitless nation-building of that country has only
made enemies in that region.
The Illinois senator accused both McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), his Democratic opponent, of
maintaining stances on Iraq which represent the conventional, false reasoning which has permeated
Washington for the last several years. Senators McCain and Clinton voted for the 2002 resolution which
allowed Bush to send U.S. troops to Iraq. Bush invaded the country in March 2003.
Phil Singer, Clinton's campaign spokesman, spun that Obama took "practically no action to end the war until
he started his White House run while Senator Clinton has been a consistent critic of Iraq for many years."
And a McCain spokesman claimed Obama pushes a risky U.S. troop pullout from Iraq which may allow the
country to slide into genocide and civil war.
Both camps are lying.
The only consistency which Sen. Clinton has showed on Iraq has been her inconsistency. First she voted to go
into Iraq, then only began to pose as an opponent the moment it started to turn especially ugly.
A person who cannot be honest about her own changing position on a subject is a poor witness for someone
else's stance on the topic, Sen. Clinton.
And McCain's position? It's a little late to worry about the breakout of civil war and genocide in Iraq. Things
which already have happened cannot be kept from happening, Sen. McCain. And continuing a war of your own
in an already war-torn nation tearing itself apart through civil strife and mutual hatred doesn't help--it only
creates more animosity, and makes matters that much worse.
If Iraq does need outside help, it can only come from forces trained to keep the peace, not those drilled for
war. Claiming that even more war will somehow bring peace to an imploding nation is like claiming that only
more crime will bring order to a crime-filled neighborhood.
McCain, who loves claiming that his experience in national security makes him the top presidential choice,
revealed a shocking lack of knowledge on Iraq and the Middle East on Tuesday.
On a tour of Europe and the Middle East meant to underpin those national security credentials, the apparent
GOP nominee got confused when discussing with reporters just which Islamist group in Iraq is supposed to be
working with neighboring Iran.
During a news photo-op in Amman, Jordan, McCain wrongly proclaimed that Shi'ite Iran is a supporter of the
small Sunni group al-Qaeda in Iraq. A colleague soon corrected his gaffe.
The group al-Qaeda in Iraq is "a mostly homegrown, though foreign-led, Sunni-based insurgency. Experts
question how closely--or even whether--the group is connected to the international al-Qaeda network,"
according to a recent AP story.
Obama was quick to pounce on McCain's obvious lack of knowledge.
"Just yesterday, we heard Senator McCain confuse Sunni and Shi'ite, Iran and al Qaeda," Obama stated.
"Maybe that is why he voted to go to war with a country that had no al Qaeda ties. Maybe that is why he
completely fails to understand that the war in Iraq has done more to embolden America's enemies than any
strategic choice that we have made in decades," he added.
McCain is continuing Bush's sophistical trick of the Complex Question or Compound Argument on Iraq--he
simply combines two completely unrelated things, and then insists that they are the same thing. To Bush,
McCain, and other neo-conservatives, Iraq is al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda is Iraq.
They're not close to being the same thing. Al-Qaeda was not even in Iraq until we invaded that nation for no
good reason--they didn't make Iraq a center in the war of terror, George W. Bush and his rabid followers did
that.
Now, it's possible al-Qaeda has a handful of terror cells in Iraq. But they surely have terror cells in practically
every other country in the Middle East.
They also have terror cells in New Zealand. And in Germany. And in Spain. They in fact have terror cells in more
than 170 different countries around the globe.
Al-Qaeda is a worldwide terror network, based not in Iraq, but in Afghanistan--particularly along the hilly Afghan-
Pakistani border.
Obama seemed to point out this fact as well, mocking McCain's vow to chase Osama bin Laden to "the gates
of hell" if elected. If that's so, Obama retorted, then America must re-focus its war effort on Afghanistan rather
than Iraq.
"We have a security gap when candidates say they will follow Osama bin Laden to 'the gates of hell,' but refuse
to follow him where he actually goes," declared Obama.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!