Betcha didn't know that John McShame is clueless about foreign policy
Harry Hope
http://www.slate.com/id/2195865/
July 23, 2008
How Much Does John McCain Really Know About Foreign Policy?Not as much
as he'd like you to think.
By Fred Kaplan
After Barack Obama's opening day in Iraq this week, the New York Times
headline read, "For Obama, a First Step Is Not a Misstep."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/us/politics/22assess.html?_r=1&scp=9&sq=Obama%20Afghanistan&st=cse&oref=slogin
The story, by Richard Oppel Jr. and Jeff Zeleny, noted, "Mr. Obama
seemed to have navigated one of the riskiest parts of a weeklong
international trip without a noticeable hitch."
That was the big nail-biter:
Would Obama, the first-term senator and foreign-policy newbie, utter
an irrevocably damaging gaffe?
The nightmare scenarios were endless.
Maybe he would refer to "the Iraq-Pakistan border,"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC0Y7zMcn_4 or call the Czech Republic
"Czechoslovakia" (three times),
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/us/politics/23mccain.html?scp=1&sq=McCain%20Czechoslovakia%20Czech&st=cse
or confuse Sunni with Shiite,
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/18/a_mccain_gaffe_in_jordan.html
or say that the U.S. troop surge preceded (and therefore caused) the
Sunni Awakening in Anbar province.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/22/eveningnews/main4283813.shtml
But, of course, it was Obama's opponent, John McCain—the war hero and
ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee—who uttered
these eyebrow-raisers.
"Czechoslovakia" was clearly a gaffe, and understandable for anyone
who was sentient during the Cold War years.
What about the others, though?
Were they gaffes—slips of the tongue, blips of momentary fatigue?
Or did they reflect lazy thinking, conceptual confusion, a mind frame
clouded by clichéd abstractions?
If Obama had blurted even one of those inanities (especially the one
about the Iraq-Pakistan border), the media and the McCain campaign
would have been all over him like red ants on a wounded puppy.
McCain caught almost no hell for his statements—they were barely noted
in the mainstream press—most likely because they didn't fit the
campaign's "narrative."
McCain is "experienced" in national-security matters;
therefore, if he says something that's dumb or factually wrong, it's a
gaffe or he's tired.
Obama is "inexperienced," so if he were to go off the rails, it would
be a sign of his clear unsuitability for the job of commander in
chief.
It may be time to reassess this narrative's premise—or to abandon it
altogether and simply examine the evidence before us.
Quite apart from the gaffes, in formal prepared speeches, McCain has
proposed certain actions and policies that raise serious questions
about his suitability for the highest office.
http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/News/Speeches/43e821a2-ad70-495a-83b2-098638e67aeb.htm
As president, he has said, he would boot Russia out of the G-8 on the
grounds that its leaders don't share the West's values.
He would form an international "League of Democracy" as a united front
against the forces of autocracy and terror.
And though it's not exactly a stated policy, he continues to employ as
his foreign-policy adviser an outspoken, second-tier neoconservative
named Randy Scheunemann, who coined the term "rogue-state rollback"
and still prescribes it as sound policy.
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=18768&prog=zgp&proj=zusr
Evicting Russia from the group of eight leading industrial nations may
have some visceral appeal, but it has at least two drawbacks.
First, all the G-8's other members are opposed to the notion.
Second, the main issues that concern the G-8—for instance, climate
change, energy policy, nuclear nonproliferation, and
counterterrorism—cannot be fully addressed without Russia's
participation.
The idea of a League of Democracy has a nice ring, especially given
the United Nations' frequent obstructionism in the face of human
misery and common danger.
The obstructionism stems in part from vetoes by Russia or China,
which, of course, would not be members of this league.
But there are a few problems here as well.
First, democratic nations often differ on high-profile issues (e.g.,
the invasion of Iraq, the rules of engagement in Afghanistan, the
Kyoto Treaty, etc.).
Second, very few of the world's pressing problems break down along the
lines of democracies vs. nondemocracies, either by topic or
constituency.
Third, creating such an overtly ideological bloc as a central tool of
foreign policy would only alienate the excluded nations—and possibly
incite them to form an opposing bloc.
The challenge is to find common solutions to global problems, not to
encumber them in a new Cold War.
As for rolling back rogue states, one would hope that McCain has
learned some lessons from George W. Bush's failures as even Bush
himself has done, albeit belatedly—for instance, in deciding to
negotiate with the North Koreans (though not until after they tested
an atomic bomb).
Someone should ask McCain:
Would he cut off those talks?
Does he value Scheunemann's advice?
If so, which rogues does he hope to topple next, and with whose army
does he plan to do it? (Ours is overbooked at the moment.)
In other words, how much does John McCain really know about foreign
policy after all?
It's a question to be asked and answered, not brushed away as
impertinent.
______________________________________________
"People in glass houses should always wear clothes."
Anonymous
Harry
Youre Another
<riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
--------------------------------------
Ignorance does not restrain
The flapping jaw of John McCain.
Confabulation? He's a master
Got a rumor? No one's faster
Master blaster John McCain!
---------------------------------------