"I admit to being a tad despondent about this global belief that Obama would be better in managing world affairs. Let’s be clear cut, you want to talk to anyone including America’s sworn enemies without pre-conditions, you want to pull back forces from overseas, draw down the military, move money away from military programs, retire carrier battle groups, pull away from hot spots.... and this will not impact America's and the world’s better interests … Don’t think so."
Well it’s a good thing the citizens of the world are not voting in the upcoming Presidential elections, after all no-one likes a foregone conclusion of this magnitude, Obama would win in a landslide.
People around the world are hoping a new president in the White House will bring positive change to US foreign policy — and more trust Sen. Barack Obama rather than Sen. John McCain to, "do the right thing" in world affairs, according to an international survey of 24 countries by the Pew Research Center. The world loves Obama," said Moises Naim, editor of Foreign Policy magazine. "If the election was held today in the world, Obama would win." Read more here …
The latest Pew Report only confirms what I had suspected for over a year now. The world loves Obama and has little time, understanding or even knowledge of McCain.
Late last year a local (Australian) current affairs program conducted street interviews about Presidential hopefuls. Not surprisingly, nearly all preferred Obama without I might add, adding any worthy reason their preference - more on this later. Several even incorrectly cited Hillary as his opponent come November ’08 … D’oh! Moreover, just a few weeks back, while at a dinner table, a couple of the guests were talking about Obama and Hillary and while once again favoring the former, I ventured to ask what they thought of his, “republican opponent”; they struggled to name him. This is what happens when mainstream media continues to focus on one candidate. I hope this is not happening in the U.S.!
Perplexing how people around the globe express more confidence in Obama in relation to foreign policy and world affairs when in fact this remains his most fallible area. Back to the current affair interviews, I recall some of the week responses some gave about Obama and the war in Iraq, (he) "knows what he’s doing,” "can be believed,” “I don’t think America would be in Iraq if he were President.” Now all this was interesting, as I recall, Obama was dithering all over the place about Iraq, so I scrounged around and found an interesting timeline of his changing positions:
- October 2, 2002: In Chicago wearing a “war is not an option” pin, he thrilled the anti-war rally by disparaging the Iraq war as a "dumb war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle, but on politics."
- The Audacity of Hope: When America was obtaining clear victories on the ground in Iraq, Obama wrote, "I began to suspect that I might have been wrong [about the war]"
- March 28, 2003: On CNN, Obama claimed that he, "Absolutely wants to make sure that the troops have sufficient support to be able to win."
- Democratic National Convention July 2004: His only mention of the war was, "There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported it." The day after his speech, Senator Obama told reporters that the United States had an "absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success. He stated that failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster and would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective".
- Same month: He was no longer certain how he would have voted. "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know." (The New York Times on July 26.)
- 2004 Election: To keep in line with his party's candidates Kerry and Edwards, who had voted for the Iraq War, he told The New York Times, "I'm always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought [the war] was such a bad idea was that I didn't have the benefit of U.S. intelligence."
- After the election: Obama regained his certainty on the Charlie Rose Show. When Rose asked him if he would have voted against the Iraq War resolution had he been in Congress, Obama's answer was a simple, "Yes."
- July 2004: Obama told the Chicago Tribune "[t] here's not that much difference between my position [on the war] and George Bush's position at this stage."
- November 2005 speech: He called for a gradual withdrawal of forces. "Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw".
- December 2005: He told the Chicago Tribune, "It is arguable that the best politics going into '06 would be a clear, succinct message: 'Let's bring our troops home...But whether that's the best policy right now, I don't feel comfortable saying it is."
- January 2007: (just before announcing his run for the Presidency), for example, he outlined a plan to begin "redeployment of U.S. forces no later than May 1, 2007" and "remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008."
- In July 2007: The AP reported it this way, "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."
- March 2008: He vows to "immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq."
I admit to being a tad despondent about this global belief that Obama would be better in managing world affairs. Let’s be clear cut, you want to talk to anyone including America’s sworn enemies without pre-conditions, you want to pull back forces from overseas, draw down the military, move money away from military programs, retire carrier battle groups, pull away from hot spots.... and this will not impact America's and the world’s better interests … Don’t think so.
As the earlier piece concluded:
“Judgment is surely one of the qualities we need in our next President. We are all called upon to make our own judgments in the months leading to the November election. One judgment we need to make is whether we want the Oval Office to be the world's most dangerous classroom?”
Forgive me for weighing into U.S. politics just this once, but in view of the imbalanced and partial coverage out there …