Here is McCain using his expertise to tell America what to expect in the war. And here is Obamo in contrast who seems to be better fit for being commander in chief, who recognizes what to expect from the Iraq War.

============article

In a pre-invasion interview on CNN (Late Edition, 11/29/02), McCain stated:

We're not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we're not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.

He added, "I don't think it's, quote, 'easy,' but I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time." On MSNBC (Hardball, 3/24/03), he stated that "we will be welcomed as liberators."

In contrast, Obama made a prominent speech around the same time (10/2/02) that now seems strikingly prescient:

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al-Qaeda.


The assumption of Williams' question is that the candidate who was completely wrong about the Iraq invasion has "vast expertise" and "credibility" on national security, while the candidate who correctly foresaw the consequences needs to prove his foreign policy qualifications. One wonders whether Williams is using "expertise" as a synonym for "hawkishness."

On NBC, 'Expertise' Means Getting Iraq Wrong

__________________
One Tin Soldier Walked Away...............


Vote like your life and your families life depends on it - because it does.

Vote like you want peace & prosparity for America - because the right wants more wars, more casualities, more VA hospitals.

Vote like you want a secured border from terrorists, illegal aliens, drugs, and gun runners - because the right offerred you a few miles of wire fence.

You are going to get a lot of cricket chirps from the right side on this, me thinks.

__________________

They can't because when you look at McCain, really look at him, he's an embarrassment. In fact just like Bush, McCain has been an embarrassment his entire life. The quotes you put up only serve to prove that McCain, the man who claims his five years as a prisoner of war makes him an expert on military matters, is as ignorant as they come in matters of military engagements. Yet somehow the media and the republicans have managed to package him as if he was General Eisenhower reborn.

Many Vietnam Vets hate and despise McCain and well they should. They have been paying closer attention to the truth about this person. I had only wished that in 2000 someone in the military would have stood up and told the truth about Bush....

__________________
I'm Proud I never Voted For Bush!



PAT PAULSEN FOR PRESIDENT

Wrong. Your comments in that thread were off topic and designed to derail the thread. In addition, Obama's comments were posted once he gave his response to McCains invitation. If you are going to start a trolling thread about "showing just how foolish they and McCain are." then it seems that Moderators should intervene. That is unless they agree with the topic.

Here is the thread that you are referring to. Reading this thread completely will show that your OP is faulty and based on spin. Your comments were also bringing up Bush, which had NOTHING to do with the threads topic.

Obama Should Go To Iraq - Political Fever - The Political Debate Forums

The double standards here just amaze me.

Well They are on topic here, so whats up?

__________________

You know if you spent more time talking about the issues and less pretending to be the judge and jury of the moderators and other peoples posts you might actually be worth reading.

I don't feel like repeating myself. I was very clear in my previous post.

This simple question needs to be answered. How does one vote for the the guy who said "I don't think it's, quote, 'easy,' but I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time." On MSNBC (Hardball, 3/24/03), he stated that "we will be welcomed as liberators."

Instead of the guy who said. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al-Qaeda.

When the latter was Obviously correct.

__________________

My issue is with the first two sentences of the OP. They are not true and I have commented on that. If you base the topic of this OP on those two sentences that are not true, then all you have is a thread that is designed to show how "foolish" members are. That is considered baiting.

The OP's topic is:

"show just how foolish they and McCain are."

"They" refers to the members in the other thread that Shintao is referring to. Is this thread designed to ridicule other members?? Looks that way to me.

Shintao is now following all rules. this thread has a topic would you like to respond to it?

__________________