This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1BGP
Seriously.
Yes, I know, Republicans are going to try to use this as vindication, but, after a years worth of rants about how the terrorists are going to be dancing in the streets if Barack Obama is elected (do I even need to bother with providing links on that front?) well, let's just be frank: nobody, outside of the Republican Party Faithful, is going to buy that spin; not here, not now.
The leaders of Al-Qaeda may be sociopathic fundamentalists/theocrats, but they're not "stupid." They understand fully well just how damaging Soviet-Afghani war was to the Union. They want the Iraq War to continue. Not because they have a chance to establish a caliphate (they don't), but because it is breaking the US bank, and pushing the US military well past its desired limits.
They know that McCain's their man.
The terrorists, my friends, have spoken.
Yes, I know, Republicans are going to try to use this as vindication, but, after a years worth of rants about how the terrorists are going to be dancing in the streets if Barack Obama is elected (do I even need to bother with providing links on that front?) well, let's just be frank: nobody, outside of the Republican Party Faithful, is going to buy that spin; not here, not now.
The leaders of Al-Qaeda may be sociopathic fundamentalists/theocrats, but they're not "stupid." They understand fully well just how damaging Soviet-Afghani war was to the Union. They want the Iraq War to continue. Not because they have a chance to establish a caliphate (they don't), but because it is breaking the US bank, and pushing the US military well past its desired limits.
They know that McCain's their man.
The terrorists, my friends, have spoken.
4geneg
BushCo has been playing into Al-Qaeda's hands since before 9/11/01. Everything they've done has advanced OBL's plan.
5Fullmoonblue
Weren't the terrorists also going to be dancing in the street when Kerry won...? The terrorists and Michael Moore? I'm sure I remember hearing something about that a few years back...
6theoria
We've been told for years that 'terrists' prefer Democrats. Even this turns out to have been untrue.
On the other hand, the Republicans can say this endorsement cancels out Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama. Even Joe the Jihadist is against Obama's tax policy.
On the other hand, the Republicans can say this endorsement cancels out Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama. Even Joe the Jihadist is against Obama's tax policy.
8theoria
Of course, a different question can be asked: would our allies prefer Obama or McCain? This is a question team McCain doesn't wish to raise. It's a fair question though if the Republicans insist 'terrists' prefer Democrats (i.e., Obama). Take Spain: McCain refuses to meet with the Spanish prime minister. Is this position evidence of the strength of a maverick or the whacky vengefulness of an unstable egotist? Or take the "League of Democracies" idea: is this to be treated as a workable, original idea or as a risible form of macho posturing against Russia and China? What "allies" would join this "League" which would be an end run around existing international institutions (to which they are committed)? Does a person who proposes this sort of thing strike anyone as someone who could convince "allies" to contribute more to the "war against terrorism"? McCain says he pals around with Henry Kissinger. Is this supposed to instill confidence?
9jlelliott
-8 I think the answer to "would our allies prefer Obama or McCain" is pretty clear. For example, in a BBC poll of 22 nations Obama was preferred to McCain in every single one, and came in overall with a 4 to 1 preference. I think the whole word is waiting to see if America will redeem itself this November (terrorists excluded of course).
