| Dogs Rule said: @Damkira Well, I separate the willingness to send in more troops to put out the tinderbox that is Iraq since Bush started the war from the willingness to start a new war. Forgetting Iraq, what seems to be his stance on preemptive military action? How much does he favor peaceful, diplomatic resolutions to conflicts over the possibility or even the threat of war? |
McCain on preemptive war:
"I don't think you could make a blanket statement about pre-emptive war, because obviously, it depends on the threat that the United States of America faces," the senator from Arizona told his audience.
Obama's stance on preemptive war is a bit more murky:
"I would also argue that we have the right to take unilateral military action to eliminate an imminent threat to our security -- so long as an imminent threat is understood to be a nation, group, or individual that is actively preparing to strike U.S. targets (or allies with which the United States has mutual defense agreements), and has or will have the means to do so in the immediate future. Al Qaeda qualifies under this standard, and we can and should carry out strikes against them wherever we can. Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not meet this standard, which is why our invasion was such a strategic blunder." (Emphasis in text.)
