Foreign policy train wreck: Bush, McCain, McBush -- No More Years

[ProSense]

In Israel, Bush Punts

Posted by Moran Banai

While I agree with my colleagues on this site that President Bush’s appeasement comments were both ridiculous and inappropriate, they were only one aspect of what was wrong with his speech. Bush was in Israel, for the second time in his presidency and also the second time this year, at the halfway point between the launching of the Annapolis process and the end of his term, speaking to the Knesset and, in effect, to the whole region, and all he had to say about the peace process, about the Palestinians and about the U.S. role was that in 60 years, “(t)he Palestinian people will have the homeland they have long dreamed of and deserved -- a democratic state that is governed by law, and respects human rights, and rejects terror.” It was left to Israeli Prime Minister Olmert to mention that the visit “provided another important opportunity for us to discuss the advancement of a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

more

Summary: On his second trip to Israel during his entire presidency, Bush failed to address anything meaningful.

Why? He was too busy playing insane American president.

Dear Mr. President

Posted by Shawn Brimley

Sir, I thought you should be aware that your conflation of diplomacy with appeasement continues to undermine America's position in the world. The definitions of both words follow:

Diplomacy: The art or practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties, and agreements.

Appeasement: The policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.

The exercise of diplomacy is not a concession, and does not constitute appeasement.

Respectfully, Shawn.

A Note About Appeasement

Posted by Michael Cohen

So today in Israel our increasingly loathsome President felt the need to invoke the death of 6 million Jews in attacking the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. "Stay Classy" Mr. President.

He used that favorite "A" word of the neo-conservatives, appeasement, and intimated that Barack Obama's desire to speak to the Iranian government was akin to the appeasement of Nazi Germany by Neville Chamberlain.

Many people have made the argument that it's despicable for the President to attack another politician on foreign soil or that he is lying about Barack Obama's foreign policy record or that his own Secretary of Defense wants to talk to Iranian leaders . . . I could go on.

All of this is correct, but something else deserves mention: Neville Chamberlain didn't appease Hitler because he talked to him – he appeased him because he gave him half of Czechoslovakia. Or as George Costanza famously declared about Chamberlain: "You could hold his head in the toilet he'd still give you half of Europe."

Ordinarily this wouldn't matter much, but something tells me we should get used to listening to conservative commentators making the Obama-Chamberlain appeasement argument, including this moron who got eviscerated on Chris Matthews tonight. (check out the link, its a train wreck not to be missed).

If people want to quibble with Obama's pledge to meet with foreign leaders. Fine. But let's get one thing straight: it's not appeasement.

McCain Agrees With Bush’s Remarks on Appeasement

Video: Obama takes on McCain/Bush

Besides McCain's endorsement of the worst president ever, there is his own hypocrisy:

McCain's Hamas Flip-Flop

Posted by Michael Cohen

Today in the Washington Post, Jamie Rubin has a bit of a blockbuster - apparently John McCain wasn't always Hamas's greatest nightmare. In an interview two years ago conducted with the UK's Sky News he had this to say about Hamas after their victory in parliamentary elections:

Rubin: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"

McCain: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.

What's most amazing about this comment is that McCain actually goes further than Barack Obama in advocating diplomatic talks with Hamas. Obama has said he is against talking to the terrorist group and his greatest crime, according to McCain and others, is that he was "endorsed" by Hamas leadership. But here we have McCain taking a pro-active position that advocates reaching out to Hamas leadership. For the most part I think McCain is correct here but I'd really like to know how he squares this comment with his argument that a) he would be Hamas's "worst nightmare" and b) "I never expect for the leader of Hamas... to say that he wants me as president of the United States."

Based on these words I would imagine that Hamas might prefer John McCain.

McCain supported talks with Syria, too

Give it a day or two, he'll be back to that position, or he'll find another to contradict the current one.

Straight-Talk Derailed

Posted by Patrick Barry

For years, John McCain has been touting his 'straight-talk express,' a place where he can candidly discuss the issues with the American people, a place free of the sound-bytes, exaggerations, and empty promises that typify life on the campaign trail. For years, this thrill-ride of openness has excused every foible, every embellishment, every distortion that the Senator has made, all because Mr. Straight-Shooter says he wants nothing more than to have an honest discussion with regular folks.

This train has kept-a-rollin’ even as the Senator from Arizona has dropped bomb after illogical, ill-founded bomb. He claimed on Hardball that there wasn’t a history of violent clashes between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq. Even as reality caught up with him, McCain declared on Face the Nation that troops could be there for as long as 10,000 years so they weren’t on the “front lines.” Turning a country riven by bloody, sectarian conflict into a troop-filled, but violence-free utopia would be a pretty astounding feat, but no one ever bothered to ask McCain how he intended to achieve it. Bob Schieffer barely followed-up.

Today, however, the straight-talk express finally careened off the tracks. Sanguine, rosy-eyed, pollyannaish, none of these words come close to describing the piece of delusional farce that passed as McCain’s vision for the world’s foreign policy. Iraq democratic, Bin Laden defeated, Afghanistan stabilizing. He literally promised everything except a pony for each toddler. What he didn’t do was explain how he would it all happen. He never once elaborated on what he would do to bring this dream to fruition. Instead he stood contentedly at the podium, more than willing to prize sound-byte over substance, more than happy to make empty promises, believing that Americans would give him one more pass.

All craziness taken into consideration, McCain is not fit to lead this country.

Gary Hart

John McCain and al Qaeda

Posted May 14, 2008

<...>

Worst of all, a formerly "maverick" Republican, one who was sensible enough to understand the dangerous perversions involved in this radicalization of American politics, will find himself repeating the idiotic mantra that we are "fighting al Qaeda in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here."

John McCain knows better. I know he knows better. But it is appalling when a serious patriot like McCain is forced to fall into line with these radical perverters of language, one of the most dangerous things that can happen in a democracy, in order to lead a party that is so far off the mainstream rails that it will take decades to return to civility and normality.

If John McCain seriously believes we are at war with al Qaeda in Iraq, that alone is such a serious error in judgment as to rank him with George W. Bush at his worst and therefore disqualify him from any chance to govern this country.

John McCain is intelligent enough to know that our tragically flawed invasion of Iraq has indeed kicked open a hornets nest, a 1300 year old hornets nest of violent rivalry inside Islam, and that for us to put all the hornets back in the nest will take decades and trillions of dollars, that it will assure the decline of the American republic, and that it will represent a grasp at empire that would cause all of our founders to revolve in their graves.

Why then would he, a combat veteran, a courageous prisoner of war, permit himself to be captive to the perverters of language? Does he want to be president so badly that he will join that band of radicals who have seriously damaged American democracy, who have tortured and lied, who have twisted our very Constitution so wrongly that it is hardly recognizable?

I refuse to believe it. It is not the John McCain I have known for 30 years.

John McCain can redeem himself and redeem the soul of his party by admitting once and for all that what is flawed about Iraq is not our military strategy, not our lack of will, not our failure of national commitment. It is that we chose the wrong war at the wrong time with the wrong enemy. John McCain's problem is not al Qaeda. His problem is George W. Bush and the people he chose to advise him.

We will pay for their arrogance for years to come. Our 35,000 casualties are paying with their lives and their futures.

More from Weathervane McCain

[monmouth]

1. What a great post. I have so many people to e-mail this to. Many thanks..n/t

[ProSense]

3. Thanks, and

thanks for spreading the word about McCain. :)

[Olney Blue]

2. No more years- good slogan.

[ProSense]

5. Not original, but thanks. End Bush's presidency, for good. n/t

[anonymous171]

4. Bush has made America less safe.

McCain, as Bush's third term, will continue to damage America's safety and reputation.

[ProSense]

7. McCain is acting like a crazy person. n/t

[ProSense]

6. Countdown #4 (Rachel M. hosting): McBush Diplomacy. n/t

[ProSense]

8. After Endorsing Bush’s Comments, McCain Camp Claims ‘We Never Used The Term Appeasement

After Endorsing Bush’s Comments, McCain Camp Claims ‘We Never Used The Term Appeasement’

[ProSense]

9. Excellent slogan

[me b zola]

10. K&R

:kick:

[ProSense]

11. Obama gives McCain a history lesson

In a speech in Chicago this morning, McCain said Obama had downplayed the threat posed by Iran when the Democrats said yesterday in Oregon that Iran spends much less on its military and would not stand a chance against the United States in the instance of a conflict -- and that America should be open to negotiating with the country from its position of strength.

McCain said Iran produced the deadliest explosive devices used in Iraq to kill American soldiers, supported terrorist groups, was bent on Israel's destruction, and was intent on acquiring nuclear weapons. The Arizona senator also argued that meeting with Iran's president without preconditions would legitimize a dangerous leader on the world stage.

Obama hit back hard. "John McCain, he’s said, ‘Oh, Obama doesn’t understand the threat of Iran.’ I understand the threat of Iran. But what I know is that the Soviet Union had the ability to destroy the world several times over, had satellites spanning the globe, had huge masses of conventional military power -- all directed at destroying us."

Obama went on to talk about the threats Iran poses, citing many of the same points McCain has. He argued the "Bush-McCain policy of fighting an endless war in Iraq and refusing to pursue direct diplomacy with Iran" was to blame for Iran's strengthened position and suggested McCain wanted to double down on Bush's policy rather than dealing with threats like nuclear proliferation.

"John McCain is right that the greatest threat we face is a terrorist with a nuclear weapon -- that’s why when he was busy supporting a war against a country that had no nuclear weapons, I was busy in the Senate working with Republican Dick Lugar to pass legislation to secure loose nuclear weapons and loose nuclear materials around the world!"

link

(emphasis added)

Smack down.