Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
A new ad from Hillary Clinton's campaign hits Barack Obama on his turning down a debate in Wisconsin.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • cecilbeanie

    I actually did more than that.

    Read the post I placed an hour and a half before you started giving valuable advice gratis.

    If you are Obama-hawk, you are in luck. If you ever wanted an end to the war, sorry, Obama's advisers have other plans for us.

  • Back to Anatomy 101 for you Alex

    "And this ad really goes for the knees, at Obama's strength."

    Strong points = knees

    Not so much... I'm just saying.

  • ezhik2

    First, I wonder if you could post where folks can find the materials you studied that led to your conclusion that Sen. Obama does not want to end the war in Iraq and that those of us who support him are "Obama-hawks". I am willing to consider other information in analyzing and forming my positions on the issues.

    Second, Sen. Obama opposed the war from the beginning (I believe he made a speech in Oct 2002 - it is probably on his website). However, he never said that he opposed all wars just "dumb" and "rash" ones. He also believes that not only was the war dumb but that it was executed incompetently, hence the disaster we now face. And, of course, contrary to your assertion, he sincerely wants to end the war (maybe you are confusing him with John McCain who apparently wants to remain in Iraq forever) and, of course, Senator Clinton sincerely wants to end it as well. The time is long past to point fingers about who was right back then and who was wrong. Now is the time to figure out how to get out responsibly (unlike the way we got in). I believe that both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton want to do so and do it responsibly. It is very easy to get into a pissing match on the campaign trail about who will end the war sooner - that's what candidates do - it is never predictive of what will happen once in office. Until our new President takes office none of them knows what is actually possible and how quickly it can be achieved. The next president will most likely be Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John McCain. If you oppose the war and you want our next President to get us out you'll vote for the Democratic nominee - unless you can think of a better way than to rely on our elected leaders to do the job. On each of the 3 candidates websites they set forth their very detailed plans for Iraq - for those folks who have not yet voted in a primary (or even if you have)it is well worth reading these. In fact, it is vital to our democracy that we all take the time to carefully review and understand each candidates positions to make an informed choice. Yes, the websites are campaign tools but the detailed position papers posted on them can give you a pretty good idea of what each candidate would like to do given the chance and the circumstances she/he finds upon taking office.

    And, ezhik2, I know I am merely speculating here but I wonder if the aspects of his plan that lead you to conclude that he is a "hawk" who does not want to get out of Iraq are the following:

    1.) He thinks that we should leave a residual force to protect diplomatic and military personnel in Iraq and to continue striking at al Qaeda. This seems to me sensible, necessary and responsible and in no way makes either me or Sen. Obama a hawk.

    2.) Sen. Obama reserves the right, in the event of an outbreak of genocide, to intervene along with the international community, if necessary to provide safehaven for civilians. Again, I have no problem with this - do you think we should just say "fuck you" to the Iraqi people who have already suffered so terribly.

    3.) His proposal to finish the fight in Afghanistan and re-deloy 2 brigades there is spot on and it is something that we should have done years ago. We abandoned Afghanistan when we went into Iraq just as we did after the Soviets pulled out. And it was we who planted the seed which grew into the Taliban which provided the spawning ground for al Qaeda.

    This is not about America "policing" the world it is about cleaning up our messes and that is not hawkish it is responsible. We have to get out Iraq and fix Afganistan but any one who believes that getting out of this bloody mess will be easy (a "cakewalk") is hopelessly naive or has blinded him/herself to the gravity of the situation. Sure, we can just decide we do not want to clean up our mess and just walk a away from it but could you live with the blood that would be on our hands? I couldn't.