Opinion: Obama talks tough
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
(UPDATE)
Barack Obama received a fair amount of criticism when, during the first Democratic presidential debate in late April, he initially did not mention retaliation in outlining how he would react to a major terrorist attack on the U.S. (He instead stressed organizing an effective emergency response and obtaining ‘good intelligence’ about new threats.) More recently, his response to a debate question last week on how he would deal diplomatically with leaders of hostile nations was characterized by Hillary Rodham Clinton as ‘naive.’
Today, Obama sought to cast himself as more of a cold-eyed realist in foreign policy.
In a major speech in Washington, the Illinois senator said that as president, he would not hesitate to launch a military attack against terrorists in another nation -- specifically, Pakistan -- regardless of how that country’s government viewed the matter. The Times’ Paul Richter has a web story here and in Thursday’s print editions. For a text of the Obama speech go here and scroll to the bottom.
Although rejecting the war in Iraq as ‘the wrong battlefied,’ Obama said in remarks at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars that just because President Bush ‘misrepresents our enemies does not mean we do not have them.’
He focused on what he would do to root out terrorists, and his comments on Pakistan likely will generate the speech’s headlines. Asserting that those ‘who murdered 3,000 Americans’ on Sept. 11 are holed up in Pakistani mountains, he said: ‘If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President (Pervez) Musharraf won’t act, we will.’
Obama also pledged to send at least two more military brigades to battle terrorists in Afghanistan and to increase U.S. financial aid there by $1 billion.
The reaction from the left side of the netroots ...
... will be fascinating to watch over the next 24 hours (as will the reception Obama receives this weekend when he and most of the other Democratic presidential candidates travel to Chicago for the YearlyKos convention -- a gathering of progressive bloggers).
A quick look at the early blogger response indicates that Obama can expect some abuse. Check out this headline and posting on MyDD.com.
Jerome Armstrong, the founder of the site, in his initial take on Obama’s position describes it as ‘basically a continuation of the Bush-Cheney doctrine of endorsing unilateral preemptive military attacks abroad, lighter perhaps, but certainly not the mentality that would pull us out of the Mideast quagmire.’
Given the overall coverage the speech will get, it also will be worth watching whether Obama expands the nature of the debate over foreign policy in the Democratic campaign. As The Times’ Doyle McManus wrote in Sunday’s edition, the various candidates have been highlighting their plans for getting the U.S. out of Iraq while spending less time discussing Al Qaeda and terrorism.
In another portion of his address, Obama detailed steps he would take to improve relations with the Muslim world. These included a commitment that during his first 100 days in the White House, he would ‘travel to a major Islamic forum and deliver an address to ... make clear that we are not at war with Islam.’
Part of Obama’s childhood was spent in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Islamic nation, and even before today’s speech it’s been clear that improving America’s standing among the masses of Muslims is an issue that resonates for him.
-- Don Frederick