With the second Presidential debate on the horizon, both tickets have increased their focus on what Senator Joe Biden referred to as a “fundamental difference” between the two campaigns: the Iraq War. The issue was a key topic in last week’s Vice Presidential Debate.
Biden, the nominee for the Democratic ticket, and Republican Governor Sarah Palin firmly opposed each other as they began discussing foreign policy. While Palin continued to praise the surge strategy and great American generals, and repeatedly emphasized the need to win in Iraq, Biden stressed Obama’s exit strategy, the importance of transferring responsibility to Iraqi officials and ending the conflict.
“For John McCain there is no end in sight... We will end this war,” Biden told voters.
Overall, the candidates’ discussion of Iraq showed more than a difference of opinion on military strategy. It illustrated a rift between the basic philosophies of the two campaigns.
While the McCain campaign has told us over and over that we must win, we must be victorious (in other words, we must prove US dominance over Iraq or risk looking weak), the Obama campaign is ready to shift power to another party. The Democratic ticket’s strategy is looking for a way to cooperate with other states, rather than desperately clutching and the chance to prove superiority.
The bottom line? Obama and Biden don’t see cooperation as a loss of political power—while Palin and McCain can’t imagine a way to solve the conflict without proving the United States is the biggest, toughest country around. We’ll never evolve beyond this cave-man logic unless we have a president who believes it’s possible, even if that means waving the “white flag of surrender.”
Watch the VP Debate:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/vice-presidential-debate.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment