Spring Break
In the November election, experience matters
Matt Stevens
Issue date: 10/7/08 Section: Commentary
With no appetite for a protracted and bloody fight in Somalia, President Clinton quickly ordered a complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Somalia. In 1995, a terrorist bomb killed five Americans at a U.S-run military training center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Once again, the Clinton administration took no decisive retaliatory action.
After all of these bin Laden-linked attacks, President Clinton turned down an offer from the Sudan to extradite bin Laden to the U.S. With so little decisiveness of the part of the U.S., the Sept. attacks were, if not guaranteed, certainly more likely to happen, as al-Qaida's operational capacity was virtually untouched and the organization was equipped with a very powerful recruiting tool.
Recently, several government insiders declared that the government's failure to act on these early al-Qaida attacks was a direct result of President Clinton's inexperience in this arena. One cannot help but wonder what would have happened had the first President Bush still been in office when these incidents occurred. While it is impossible to know for sure, it is a good bet that his experience would have led him to take these events seriously and respond in kind.
Now flash-forward 16 years. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) cites his experience as a reason to elect him president. As a congressman, McCain served on the House Committee on International Relations. For many years, he has served on the Senate Armed Services committee and is currently the committee's ranking member. McCain once served on a subcommittee that focuses on U.S. readiness to confront emerging threats. Above all, though, he has been dealing with national issues for a quarter of a century. When McCain argues for his experience, he, like the first President Bush, is accused of trying to distract attention from an idea gap in the economic arena.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), like then-Gov. Clinton, is seen as likeable and in touch with the people while the country faces a recession. While economics is a very important domain and many people are obviously hurting at this time, economics will not mean anything if the U.S. is not safe from its enemies. Sen. Obama, like Clinton was in the past, is very inexperienced in the national security and foreign affairs arenas. For starters, Obama has only been a senator and dealing has been with national issues for four years and in two of these four years, he spent more time on the campaign trail than in the Senate. While Obama is a member of the important Foreign Relations Committee, just this past July CNN reported that he has misidentified a committee he was on. The question becomes: If Obama has spent so little time working on national security and foreign affairs issues, how can he have developed the instincts needed to protect the U.S. in a post-Sept. 11 world? With this in mind, voters must remember the lesson of 1992 when they go to cast their votes.
After all of these bin Laden-linked attacks, President Clinton turned down an offer from the Sudan to extradite bin Laden to the U.S. With so little decisiveness of the part of the U.S., the Sept. attacks were, if not guaranteed, certainly more likely to happen, as al-Qaida's operational capacity was virtually untouched and the organization was equipped with a very powerful recruiting tool.
Recently, several government insiders declared that the government's failure to act on these early al-Qaida attacks was a direct result of President Clinton's inexperience in this arena. One cannot help but wonder what would have happened had the first President Bush still been in office when these incidents occurred. While it is impossible to know for sure, it is a good bet that his experience would have led him to take these events seriously and respond in kind.
Now flash-forward 16 years. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) cites his experience as a reason to elect him president. As a congressman, McCain served on the House Committee on International Relations. For many years, he has served on the Senate Armed Services committee and is currently the committee's ranking member. McCain once served on a subcommittee that focuses on U.S. readiness to confront emerging threats. Above all, though, he has been dealing with national issues for a quarter of a century. When McCain argues for his experience, he, like the first President Bush, is accused of trying to distract attention from an idea gap in the economic arena.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), like then-Gov. Clinton, is seen as likeable and in touch with the people while the country faces a recession. While economics is a very important domain and many people are obviously hurting at this time, economics will not mean anything if the U.S. is not safe from its enemies. Sen. Obama, like Clinton was in the past, is very inexperienced in the national security and foreign affairs arenas. For starters, Obama has only been a senator and dealing has been with national issues for four years and in two of these four years, he spent more time on the campaign trail than in the Senate. While Obama is a member of the important Foreign Relations Committee, just this past July CNN reported that he has misidentified a committee he was on. The question becomes: If Obama has spent so little time working on national security and foreign affairs issues, how can he have developed the instincts needed to protect the U.S. in a post-Sept. 11 world? With this in mind, voters must remember the lesson of 1992 when they go to cast their votes.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Conservative
posted 10/07/08 @ 11:27 AM EST
mccain also argues for continued engagement in iraq, expanded engagement in afghanistan, cowboy posturing against iran, and unconditional support for israel. (Continued…)
Webby
posted 10/07/08 @ 1:38 PM EST
Nader really is the best choice for this country. It's a shame that no one will give him air time and people are too blinded by -D or -R to listen to a person that really is the smartest choice. (Continued…)
Post a Comment