Obama on Foreign Policy Issues

I felt compelled to write this for some relatives of mine, outlining my beliefs with regards to Obama and foreign policy experience. After reading this, watch the foreign policy debate on Friday, Sept. 26th and decide for yourself who would be better at handling foreign affairs as our next president. I've tried to document all of my statements from a variety of news and information sources.

Summary: In respect to foreign policy initiatives, Obama has been ahead of national opinion, and both McCain and the Bush administration, in suggesting deft and bold strategies to address national security in a comprehensive manner. Namely, he stated the Iraq War was a bad idea from the beginning, supports attacking Al-Queda bases in Pakistan, supports the effort in Afghanistan, suggests direct talks with Iran, and advocates a timetable for withdrawal. ALL OF THESE POSITIONS are now supported to some degree by the Bush Admin. and McCain, even after they ridiculed him for months, if not years. This is a man with vision who is keen and able to stick to his overarching beliefs even as he makes on-his-feet decisions based on solid intelligence and information. After being misled for 8 years, I look forward to being led by this man into a more peaceful world and stable economy.

1. IRAQ WAR - Obama was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and now most Americans think the Iraq war was a bad idea. He's not against all wars, just rash and dumb ones, and argues convincingly that this war is a distraction to the real issues that face Americans everyday. Read his Oct 2002 speech here; it's rather short and VERY powerful. Meanwhile, Bush and McCain played up the war drums with information now unequivocally proven as false. This previous link also details how McCain has changed his tune on Iraq, from being completely in line with the Bush Strategy/Doctrine to now trying to differentiate himself.

To me, this fact shows Obama has profound judgment on military matters (no matter the intelligence) and is a solid student of history. He takes it seriously when we send young men and women to the battlefield to kill.

2. PAKISTAN - Obama was the first propose US counterattacks into Pakistan over a year ago (Aug. 2007), reiterating the fact that Al-Queada and their Taliban supporters orchestrated the Sept. 11th attacks and they are the real threat to America. In Feb. 2008, McCain blasted Obama for suggesting bombing our ally, Pakistan, when Obama was saying we needed to attack the Al-Queda bases if the intelligence is good, not just bomb indiscriminately. Bush also criticized Obama for threatening to attack Pakistan. Even so, the Bush Administration was attacking Pakistani targets without the Pakistani government's permission then, six months after Obama advocated for it, and now it's an openly acknowledged fact. Here is a good summary of this ongoing debate. Granted, Bush did say the US would attack Al-Queada targets in Pakistan in 2006, but later ridiculed Obama for saying the same thing in Feb 2008 during the campaign season.

To me, this fact shows Obama has surrounded himself with keen policy advisors and has access to little-known information, and will weather politcal attacks for what he knows is the right thing to do. This also is the beginning of the duplicity we now see that's so apparent in the McCain campaign.

3. AFGHANISTAN - Obama's been criticizing the bombing raids and calling for more troops in Afghanistan for at least a year. Obama has taken the issue of Afghanistan seriously since 2002, when he gave his address on the Iraq War. That same year, McCain said catching bid-Laden wasn't "that important" and in 2003, that the US can just "muddle through in Afghanistan". After years of Obama touting the need for focus on the war in Afghanistan, McCain now seems to agree on a surge there.

To me, this fact shows Obama is focused on making the US safer by intently and hotly pursuing those perpetrators of Sept. 11th, and not straining our military or distracting our focus with a misguided war in Iraq.

4. IRAN & SYRIA - Obama has stated for over a year and a half that he would engage Iran (and Syria) diplomatically. Bush and McCain both laughed at this idea, saying we can't negotiate with terrorists, even though Obama also says we don't negotiate with terrorists. In May 2006, after everyone had come to agree that talks with Iran were necessary, Bush agreed to indirect talks with Iran. Even Kissenger now agrees direct talks with Iran are necessary, "without conditions"! The only ones holding out on pursuing this avenue for peace are Bush and McCain.

To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to use all means, and especially put diplomacy first, to ensure we have a stable world order and prevent our enemies from threatening us or our allies. It also shows me that Obama's opinion is held by the majority of foreign policy experts and advisors.

5. "THE SURGE" - First, I should let Obama outline his plan for Iraq himself and address the surge issue, as he did in July 2008 in the New York Times. The surge has now allowed a limited drawdown of US troops in Iraq, and freed up these forces to now serve in Afghanistan. While violence was reduced, Maliki did not list increased troop levels as a factor to bringing calm to Iraq. Furthermore, most of the benchmarks for Iraq have not been met, the primary reason for the surge as stated by Bush; British withdrew from Basra, leaving peace; and the "surge" level is the same as the troop levels in Dec. 2005. Read more here. Hopefully now with the relative calm in violence, Iraqi politicians can now make political progress - and we should hold them accountable by gviing a time table.

To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to acknowledge the success of his rival's plans, ideas he disagreed with, to now use this success to further his own plans of moving us out of Iraq. He is a practical politician who fight's for what is right (ending the occupation) no matter how we get (out of) there. Withdrawing from Iraq is still the goal, but it will be undertaken with care and deference to good military commanders like Petraeus.

6. TIMETABLE - We know Obama has been advocating for a withdrawal timetable since Jan 2007 (a full year and a half ago). Never has anyone wanted to see us leave in defeat, which I define as another state supporting terrorism against us. Obama-Biden's plan states that while there will be no permanent bases in Iraq, a residual force will remain to protect vital national security concerns. Read their entire plan here. Yet now the Iraqi government is calling for a timetable, even citing Obama's proposal as a good guideline, and the Bush Admin. is even showing signs of agreement as of August! Even McCain thinks the timetable, or the Republican euphemism "horizons for withdrawal," is a good idea, praising Obama's proposal, even thought he thinks getting our troops home is "not too important". As Iraq's President Maliki himself stated, “Who[ever] wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”

To me, this fact shows Obama knows what it takes to stick it out with a politically unpopular decision, only later, after weathering the ridicule and questioning of experience, to see his plans vindicated.