Obama aide buys into Repuke BS about Bhutto killing...

[joeybee12]

...looks like he's agreeing this was a terrorist attack even before there is any kind of investiation...bullshit...this very well could have been orchestarted by the Musharaff government...leave it to the Obama camp to try and score points and just show how naive and unprepared they are. Barak Obama...not ready for prime time.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/us/politics/28axelrod.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

DES MOINES — The chief strategist of Senator Barack Obama’s campaign said Thursday that the assassination of the Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto “underscores the case for judgment” when voters begin to select their presidential candidates next week.

The strategist, David Axelrod, said voters should take into consideration that the Iraq war led to the rise of terrorist activity and political instability in Pakistan. Mr. Axelrod said that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton backed the Iraq war in 2002, while Mr. Obama did not. “She was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Al Qaeda, who may have been players in this event today,” he said, according to Time.com. “So that’s a judgment she’ll have to defend.”

Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, responded, saying the situation should not be politicized. “This is a time to be focused on the tragedy of the situation, its implications for the U.S. and the world, and to be concerned for the people of Pakistan and the country’s stability,” Mr. Singer said in a statement.

In a telephone interview on Thursday evening, Mr. Axelrod said it was indisputable that the war took the United States’ attention away from fighting terrorists in Pakistan.

[Missy M]

1. So he is saying we should be fighting terrorists.....

in Pakistan. Would that be considered a war, going into Pakistan? Would it be a smart war or a dumb war?

[joeybee12]

4. The big problem I have is his jumping to conclusions...that this

was terrorists...no evidence of that right now. That's what the Repukes will buy into and say we need to fight terrorists. What we need to do--or, should have done--given pakistan aid and made them reform--we gave them a free pass and lots of money with nothing to show for it. Incompetence of the Bush regime at the highest levels.

[DemKR]

2. k&R

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. Obama has said in the past that we should invade Pakistan

--a soverign nation--sound familiar (hint: Bush / Iraq).

[JackORoses]

13. do you think lying helps your cause?

What Obama actually said is that we should be willing to make attacks on terrorists inside Pakistan if we had actionable intelligence. Rather than ignoring them like Bush and Musharraf do because of their 'deal'.

This is completely different than occupying a counry like Iraq.

[joeybee12]

16. Well, we shouldn't have given Pakistan everything including the

kitchen sink...lots of money, absolutely no pressure for reforms...Bush incompetence at its finest.

[Windy]

25. Hillary supporters are blinded by loyalty to their own candidate. You cannot reason with them even

whent he FACTS are on your side!

[ellacott]

15. This is established policy of our govt.

This is not a new proposal. The criticism that Obama received was broadcasting this policy.

[Evergreen Emerald]

19. no. We do not attack soverign nations.

Unless we are Bush. Or unless we are attacked by them. To suggest to enter a soverign nation and start bombing is outrageous.

[ellacott]

23. That's not true

Biden and Wes Clark have both said that this is established policy of the U.S. It was Biden and Clark that said the Obama was wrong in broadcasting this.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

28. why don't you look up "Operation Desert Fox"

from the source of your choosing and tell me all the ways your post is incorrect?

Here's a start:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

[ellacott]

29. Clinton also bombed Afghanistan

Reagan bombed Libya.

Hillary agreed with Obama saying that if they had actionable intelligence she would act on it.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

30. not to pile on you

but I think every President this country has ever had has attacked a sovereign nation, in some respect.

http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/foabroad.htm

[William769]

5. More like Obam's mouth piece. NT

[bunnies]

6. Al-Qaeda has taken credit for it.

but whatever.

[joeybee12]

9. No, Musharef has said they're to blame...

...where did you see this?

[bunnies]

14. here

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/12/who-killed-bena.html

[joeybee12]

18. No, it's just a supposed intercept that the pakistani government

has...like they're reliable.

[bunnies]

21. You think its a set-up?

very well could be Musharraf covering his ass.

Heres another interesting tidbit: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Benazir_e-mail_implicates_Musharraf_in_death/articleshow/2659359.cms

[joeybee12]

24. Thanks for the link...

...and yes, I do...I don't trust the Mushrafe government and Obama's aide talking before any of the facts are out is just too naive.

[joeybee12]

10. No, Musharef has said they're to blame...

...where did you see this?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. It was odd they piled onto AQ so fast

Not much skepticism there...

It was probably an Islamic fundamentalist of some stripe, but AQ is only a small percentage of the Pakistani jihadi movement. Dangerous to lump everyone together for that easy answer.

[H2O Man]

8. I think that

your interpretation is a result of an error in perception.

[joeybee12]

12. How?

He's jumping to conclusions...Pakistan is blaming al Qeda, but even the people aren't buying into that.

[2rth2pwr]

11. Obama seems to have an obsession on invading Pakistan

What is the deal with that? Does it have something to do with a childhood experience?

[NYCGirl]

20. Yeah, he wrote about it

in a kindergarten essay. The Clinton campaign told me.

[2rth2pwr]

26. You can joke about it but since 2004 he has made it clear that he would have no

problem messing with a soveriegn country.

Obama would consider missile strikes on Iran
September 25, 2004 - "... I think there are elements within Pakistan right now--if Musharraf is overthrown and they took over, I think we would have to consider going in and taking those bombs out, because I don't think we can make the same assumptions about how they calculate risks." http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/printedition/chi-0409250111sep25,1,4555304.story

Obama Says He Would Take Fight To Pakistan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 2, 2007; Page A01

"When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won," he told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center in the District. He added, "The first step must be to get off the wrong battlefield in Iraq and take the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/01/AR2007080101233.html

[NYCGirl]

31. If you actually read in its entirety what he said in those two excerpts,

he makes a great deal of sense.

[2rth2pwr]

32. My original post still holds, why does he have such a h*rdon for invading

Pakistan?

[NYCGirl]

33. There's no hardon there. There are strikes as a absolutely, completely, totally

worst case scenario last resort.

[Tellurian]

17. Actually, it could have been a CIA assassination hit.. who knows?

Three bullets found their mark into Bhutto. The neck, chest and head. This had to be done by a markman in place high up to have three deadly hits in succession take down this wonderful human being who gave her life for what she believed..

[DemKR]

22. The Obama camp seems to be buying into a lot of Repuke BS lately lol

[DemKR]

27. btw, I think Edwards is surging