The term Commander in Chief in this country post 9/11 is often synonymous with warrior—with the public being encouraged to consider the war-leading potential of their next President.
The first debate offered a wonderful opportunity to show leadership qualities while also debunking the notion that bombing folks into oblivion or destroying enemies were how to successfully fight conflicts—as such the discussion at the first Presidential debate last night was disappointing.
McCain could have showed that he has a more nuanced understanding of military policy and why the surge has correlated with improvements on the ground, and Obama should have used better his command of the issues to justify why we have reached a point in Iraq where a troop withdrawal timetable is essential. Instead we got simplistic arguments that suggested we should or should not have gone to war with Iraq and that we should be focusing the fight on Afghanistan and whether to have preconditions for discussions for negotiations with Iraq. On the latter two points, Obama scored better than McCain, but Obama failed to take on sufficiently McCain’s claim that we are winning in Iraq and that withdrawing troops would lead to a wider regional conflict. Read the rest of this entry »
