August 5, 2007
Ever since before the 2004 elections, we hear the constant drone from the left that Republican supporters of the War on Terror Iraq Theater are ”Chickenhawks” if they didn’t serve in the Military and in a previous war. Viet Nam seems to be the preferred war, depending on the age of the supporter. But, not having Military and Wartime experience seems to elicit the “chickenhawk’ ad hominem nearly instantly.
Democrat first term Senator from Illinois and presidential hopeful, Barack Obama, has long been an advocate of defeat and surrender in the Iraq Theater of the War on Terror. Earlier last month, he stated the opinion that Preventing Genocide Isn’t Reason to Keep US Troops in Iraq. In may he joined fellow front-runner from the Democrat party, Hillary Clinton in voting 'no' on funding the Troops in Iraq bill. In January he submitted a bill advocating withdrawing Troops from Iraq as early as March 2007. It failed.
Said Obama in submitting that bill, "The days of our open-ended commitment must come to a close. It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy. It is time to give Iraqis their country back."
Suffice it to say Obama has been an outspoken critic of this war and staunch supporter of the anti-war left. That is why I was particularly struck upon reading that he might send troops to Pakistan, should Pakistani President Musharraf not act as he deems appropriate. This, after he announced he advocates diplomacy and negotiating with other real despotic regimes as Iran, North Korea, Syria and Cuba.
His call for Military action against Pakistan drew immediate fire from the Pakistanis. Said Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri, "It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say. As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."
Pakistan’s Deputy Information Minister Tariq Azim added, “No foreign forces would be allowed to enter Pakistan. I think those who make such statements are not aware of our contribution in the fight on terrorism.”
Which is it, Senator Obama, Diplomacy with enemies? Or attack an ally? It is little wonder Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden labels Obama as “Naïve and Irresponsible.”
Thinking back to all the years of catcalls of conservatives who never served, but support the war as being “chickenhawks,” I wonder if this means that Senator Barack Obama now joins the rank of “chickenhawks” as he too has never served in the Military, much less any war?
Knowing that the calls of “chickenhawk” coming from the left towards conservatives is pure ad hominem attacks, meant to demean and ridicule those who oppose the stance of the anti-war left, and knowing that Obama is one of the left’s darlings, I doubt we will hear Democratic Underground, DailyKOS or any other far left site label him as such.
Perhaps the Junior Senator would do well to pay heed to the words of Bruce Chapman, former American ambassador to the U.N. organizations in Vienna and president of the Discovery Institute in Seattle, as was printed in today’s Seattle Times newspaper, No Surrender.
Once again, we are exposed to the total hypocrisy of the left today in Senator Barack Obama’s Naïve and Irresponsible call for these countries.
UPDATE: Before Senator Obama becomes President (in his dreams) and has his precipitous withdrawal of Troops from the Central Front in the War on Teror, so they may attack an ally, perhaps he needs to read a little:
The Turn, Defeatists in retreat
Perceptions of Iraq War Are Starting to Shift
Major Headway in Iraq as Sheiks Swear to kill Terrorists
It appears that the left's new "chickenhawk" desires defeat in Iraq before anything else.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
August 5, 2007
Posted by Lew Waters at 10:34 PM