In their Second Presidential Debate, Senators John McCain and Barack Obama were once again asked to articulate their positions on military action as a vehicle for political change. While both candidates made safe, predictable statements about moral obligations and national security, they conversation quickly swung back to the Iraq War.
McCain once again explained the disastrous potential of changing course in Iraq, emphasizing that without a strong military presence in the country it will immediately fall into the hands of terrorists (Iran, Al-Qaeda—what’s the difference?) and lead us to a longer, more complex conflict in the future.
Obama, on the other hand, maintained that beginning the war in Iraq only weakened operations in Afghanistan, distracting the United States from its original goal and allowing Osama bin Laden to escape.
“That’s why I think it’s so important for us to reverse course, because [Afghanistan is] the central front on terrorism… the war against terrorism began in that region and that’s where it will end,” the democratic nominee told audience members.
The difference here is not only in military strategy, but personal ideology. McCain and Obama will never see eye-to-eye on this topic because they have two different perceptions of where the threat to the United States is coming from.
Obama has focused on pursuing members of Al-Qaeda, the group found responsible for the 9/11 attacks. McCain seems more concerned about Islamic Extremism—making any (and maybe every) Muslim country a potential attacker.
Once again we see the difference between the liberal and realist perspectives. Obama sees a system of states that, if approached diplomatically, can be peaceful and cooperative. McCain sees a world full of potential enemies competing for power that can never really be trusted.
Watch the Second Presidential Debate:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/second-presidential-debate.html?scp=2&sq=second%20debate%20view&st=cse
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment