Obama vs. McCain on al Qaeda in Iraq

[hiaasenrocks]

During the debate the other night Obama said: "And if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."

The next day McCain responded with: "I have news for Senator Obama. Al Qaeda is in Iraq."

Obama responded: "I have some news for John McCain, and that is there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq."

Obama is conceding the point here, that al Qaeda is in Iraq, regardless of why they are there or when they arrived. The issue in this exchange is what to do if al Qaeda is there, and Obama's response is not about whether they are there, it's why they are there.

And since he appears to be conceding that point, doesn't that call into question his response and perhaps his entire thinking on Iraq? After all, these are the parameters he set up with his own words Tuesday night. I'm not sure whether Clinton has a better plan for Iraq, but she should be jumping on this, from the "experience" (and, frankly, knowledge) angle. If she doesn't -- and it doesn't look like she will -- then McCain and the Republicans sure will.

[Flabbergasted]

1. What was the moderator's question?

[thepurpose]

2. I don't understand what your point is here.

[tabatha]

3. What he said was in response to a specific question.

Obama knows that Al Queda is in Iraq, and has been aware of it for a long time.

[hiaasenrocks]

4. Why the "if/then" response?

[jody]

5. BO is a political chameleon, he'll "change" his position to whatever seems appropriate at the moment