McCain Won't Rule Out Pre-Emptive War

uscitizen

uscitizen

Villified User
McCain Won't Rule Out Pre-Emptive War


Apr 9, 6:10 PM (ET)

By LIBBY QUAID

(AP) Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., addresses the crowd during a town...
Full Image

WESTPORT, Conn. (AP) - Republican Sen. John McCain refused Wednesday to rule out a pre-emptive war against another country, although he said one would be very unlikely.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080409/D8VUJV5O4.html
 
When you read in context his full comments I don't have a problem with what he said because it's basically the same thing every other politician would say, or at least think even if they were afraid to say it.

If in a rare senario we know we are about to be attacked I would sure hope any President of the U.S. would be willing to attack first.

Of course as with a lot of things politicians say people will interpret comments differently based on their personal beliefs and biases.
 
Yeah it sounded a lot like what bush said we will invade only if we have to , blah blah. And this one has worked out so well.
 
uscitizen said:
Yeah it sounded a lot like what bush said we will invade only if we have to , blah blah. And this one has worked out so well.
Click to expand...

If we were about to be attacked do you think Obama, if he was President, would attack first or wait for us to be hit?
 
cawacko said:
If we were about to be attacked do you think Obama, if he was President, would attack first or wait for us to be hit?
Click to expand...
You know if we only had some previous history where we KNEW someone was about to attack us. This would not be so much of a gedenken experiment. We would have some actually history to review.
 
I think he would make a bit more sure that we were indeed in peril than Bush and McSame would.

that speech just had too much of flavor of the bush sales pitch to congress in it to suit me.
 
uscitizen said:
I think he would make a bit more sure that we were indeed in peril than Bush and McSame would.

that speech just had too much of flavor of the bush sales pitch to congress in it to suit me.
Click to expand...

hence my original point Citisame.
 
Socrtease said:
You know if we only had some previous history where we KNEW someone was about to attack us. This would not be so much of a gedenken experiment. We would have some actually history to review.
Click to expand...

That's why I wrote "rare" case we find something out ahead of time.
 
The only democracy in the 20th and 21st Centuries (so far) which has attacked without being attacked is the US. And now you've got McCain refusing to rule out doing it again. Now, who the fucking hell would attack the US anyway? Fuck you're a belligerent mob. Sparta with lots of soft cushioning you lot. You'd never elect anyone as president someone who said, "I don't believe in attacking first". But you used to be okay. You didn't elect that fucking lunatic Goldwater, which was good. We'd probably be living in the ashes now if you had. But if Goldwater was around today, he'd win. What have they put in your water?
 
It's the liberal standard for defense that resulted in the previous two world wars...

Good for McCain, and us, just ask the French...
 
There is a difference between preemptive strike (bombing Bin Laden's training camps) and preemptive WAR (Iraq). Just thought I'd point out that distinction since that point seems to be lost on the resident moron of the board - WRL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top