Quantcast

Memo to President Obama

Never mind Iraq. Just end the 'war on terror.'

By Michael Hirsh | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Feb 21, 2008 | Updated: 12:31  p.m. ET Feb 21, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: maz1960 @ 03/12/2008 11:12:19 AM

    Comment: The author can make his point but keep "Global Warming" out of the conversation if you want to be considered somewhat intelligent. The polar icecaps (both poles)have grown tremendously this past winter season at each pole, we are having one of the coldest winters ina few decades, scientists are beginning to de-bunk Al Gore's "feel-good, emotional scientists"....Wake up and smell the coffee. The sun and sun spots has so much more to do about the temperature of the earth than green house gases.

  • Posted By: coll.env @ 02/28/2008 12:54:13 PM

    Comment: Why make something difficult !!!
    Sen. McCain-Business as usual.
    Sen.Hillary Clinron-To close to the Bush Family.
    Sen Barack Obama- Turn the page so the American, citenzry can finally SPEAK .

  • Posted By: Topple Government @ 02/27/2008 4:38:08 AM

    Comment: Excellent points. I really enjoyed this article!

  • Posted By: xjerseygirl @ 02/26/2008 5:43:31 PM

    Comment: When it is all said and done, this is becoming by far one of the most interesting races to the White House we have seen in years. McCain, Clinton or Obama? It will still be politics as usual. I just hope that which ever of those three is #44, he or she will be able to make things better. Right now everything is such a hugh mess. I don't count Clinton out, because as we all know, anything can happen in politics in America. We got Buch 43 didn't we? The most important thing is that the American people get out and vote. And, hopfully #44 can fix some of the mess we are in.

  • Posted By: n_ksi_1970@hotmail.com @ 02/26/2008 9:27:47 AM

    Comment: This comment refers to your article, "Memo to President Obama", where you mention the right of a people to "dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another" in the U.S. Declaration of Independence. What no American or foreign reporter ever mentions is that the U.S. almost one century after independence, fought a much bloodier, yet successful, struggle in order to deny the right of secession to territories that were not just provinces but at least nominally separate states participating in a federation or union. If not understood already I am talking about the Civil War.

    So the U.S. when invoking their principles in international relationships should make more clear what they stand for if possible. Because in the case of Yugoslavia for example the central federal government was not allowed to apply the same right that the U.S. central government used during the Civil War: to impose its will on the states participating in the Union. After that was achieved and Yugoslavia was finally dissolved, the same "principle" was extended to provinces like Kosovo. It would be nice of the U.S. government to let us know what would be the reaction if one or more states were to secede from the Union today. Wouldn't they invoke the precedent set by the victory in the Civil War? Or would this precedent be voided wrt Kosovo?

    Best regards,
    Nicholas Ksi

  • Posted By: Chapalody @ 02/26/2008 7:21:11 AM

    Comment: If Hillary was in the lead, would you give the same advice to Hillary. I think not. Except for the way Hillary voted on the war, you and Hillary seem to be equal in your liberalism. It's Obama's new tone which bothers you and most liberals like you. It seems your doing the same thing Hillary is doing. Reminding Obama of his core Democrat principles. Why does Obama rhetoric about hope and change bother you so much. It's comes across so clearly in what you have written. Your scared to death Obama won't continue on the doom and gloom ideology of the Democrat party. Obama doesn't need to be told how to attack President Bush on the war in Iraq or foreign policy. He just needs to win the Presidency first. I can see it's hard to break out of the intense and upset all the time which the voters have picked up on with Hillary. Just because Obama isn't negative all the time, doesn't mean he has abandoned his core Democrat principles.

  • Posted By: Trenton Sims @ 02/25/2008 7:18:36 PM

    Comment: On SUNDAY??
    OH No She Didn't.??

    SHAME ON YOU HOLLARY !!!
    For Todays (SUNDAY) Sacrelege, blasphemy, and Atheism..
    Mocking the Christian belief in Salvation.
    Poking fun and Sarcasm at Believing that Heaven can Open up the sky to those who believe. Laughing at the notion that there are Celestial Angelic Choirs in the Heavens, Hurling sarcasm at those who would believe they can hear. Laughing at Hope.. Laughing at GOD..!!!
    Hillary..Can you say Moses?
    Did he not part the Red Sea and free his people from the Pharoh?
    Who are you Hillary Rodham to tell us all not to believe that all things are possible through our Lord Our God?
    It is dillusional to Hope The Lord God would ever extend his ever redeeming, ever forgiving ever everlasting Love to Our Nation? To America and her United States Citizens??
    Its dillusional On SUNDAY to think this could be possible ?? 2/24/08
    One thing is certain..It won't be possible under your leadership. You are a non-believer.
    I suppose that deceased Dallas Police Officers family should abandon any HOPE for his Salvation. His life was lost performing a difficult and demanding job too. There aint NO GOD coming for him either. Right Hillary??
    May God have mercy on your immortal soul Hillary Rodham.
    SHAME ON YOU HILLARY RODHAM
    The Lord works in mysterious ways....
    And today God exposed your true dark soul to the world. And In so doing, the Nation and the World will be better served.

  • Posted By: dswenk @ 02/25/2008 6:24:40 PM

    Comment: Oh please, Christian fundamentalism is no way similar to the blood thirsty track record of Islamic Fundamentalism. We dont see Chirstian children strapping bombs to themselves to blow up innocent civilians, Christians firing rockets into Israel and hiding behind civilians, hacking off arms and legs for minor violations of laws, killing female relatives for honor killings, executing women for talking to men, etc., Chiriants immigrating in large numbers to foreign contries and trying to impose their laws on the indigents, the list goes on and on. Terrorism is rooted into Islam and they come hand in hand. Sooner or later we will be forced to see them as one and the same, the question will be if America will not relize it until it is on every street in our towns.

  • Posted By: sjones_1 @ 02/25/2008 2:24:55 PM

    Comment: Brilliant Harvard lawyers don't do this: A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama's fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses.

    • Posted By: beaker87 @ 02/28/2008 20:00:54

      Comment: You seriously think the media will even cover the issue!?! This is Obama remember, the media doesn't give him negative coverage. He could recieve money from Al-Queda and it would barely make a ripple in the media.

  • Posted By: platterpile @ 02/25/2008 2:10:31 PM

    Comment: Hello,
    This is a request that the Clinton - Obama press coverage be actually "fair and even". As a regular watcher of your political news programs I find that there is an overt Obama slant to most every story. The news readers take every liberty they are able to when the Clinton name comes up. There is NEVER a positive regarding Senator Clinton. This is stoutly unfair and heavy handed; it's obvious where the editorial stand in the sand has been taken: Obama.
    MSNBC has the responsibility to report the truth and NOT ATTEMPT TO SUBMARINE the Clinton Presidency. This is VERY FAR FROM OVER. Come to Ohio and find out the truth.
    Thank you and Best Regards,

  • Posted By: Londoner @ 02/25/2008 1:26:33 PM

    Comment: Obama said in 2002 "Im not against war in all circumstances, Im against dumb wars." Obama knows we really have to get the war on terror back on track after the "dumb" Iraq policy. Its incredibly stupid to say that since 9/11 nothing comparable has happened. They have attempted many horrendous attacks in London which were thwarted by British intelligence, attacks which would have even surpassed 9/11.

  • Posted By: Takhli @ 02/25/2008 7:26:28 AM

    Comment: Senator Obama's comment that the war in Iraq is a distraction is half right. Actually the war on terror is a distraction that is destroying the United States both economically and socially, as well as affecting its relations with other countries. I don't live in the United States, but I am an American who served in the Marine Corps in Vietnam. I returned for 50 weeks to the US from July 2005 to July 2006 after having lived outside it for over 20 years. I had been on short trips to the US, but what I saw and experienced during my 50 week stay, compared to earlier trips before 9/11 to the US, was a country suffering from malaise, a socially dysfunctiuonal society unable to focus on resolving it's internal problems ranging from inadequate health care, to failing public schools, to a country that has spent itself broke. The BBC last Friday had an article on its web "Fading mobility troubles Americans". THe Brookings Institution released a report that summarized social mobility in the US being similar to Mexico, Brazil, and Pakistan. Of the War on Terror, an Obama administration, will need to focus on the problem cited by the Brookings Institution, or the United States will have a real war on terror within its own borders between its own citizens, not too unlike the former Yugoslavia.

  • Posted By: skywalkerjlp @ 02/24/2008 6:14:09 PM

    Comment: In the United States, voter registration has never been higher (70 % of the eligible voters ) and yet there has been a steady DECLINE in voter turnout. We had a more than 10 % spike last election after Bin Laden released his video 2 days before the election, and I'm sure there will be another spike this year when Obama becomes the next President. This may placate the masses for a while, but nothing has actually changed. In this day and age of modern technology, a NATIONAL POLL - instituted so the masses can be actively involved in their REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY on a weekly basis, adding in their 2 cents on all the major issues of the week - is the best remedy for ailing voter discontentment. Of course there is probably not one elected official who would ever WANT such a thing, and that has more to do with the FACT that we are a FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC ( google United States, Wikipedia, first sentence ) and NOT a representative democracy. The PEOPLE want to be heard, my most distinguished and learned gentlemen and ladies, or so many of them would not be registering. If you truly want the people to feel positive about politics in general, why not give them an opportunity to become actively involved, say once a week, allowing them to voice their opinions on the major issues. When that day comes to pass, you will have solved voter discontentment in the United States.

  • Posted By: benvolio @ 02/24/2008 6:04:56 PM

    Comment: Hirsh's article is encouraging pause for thought. However, lots more people than are today willing to admit fell for the idea of the free world having to wage a war on terror. Come to think of it, so did I in the days and weeks following 9/11, although I have never been a Bush supporter. Then again, wouldn't even Hirsh change his mind if America was again attacked, and the masterminds were not from Al Qaeda?

  • Posted By: xyz223 @ 02/24/2008 12:54:19 PM

    Comment: Needless discussion, since ob. will never be president!

  • Posted By: tdn0024 @ 02/24/2008 8:48:43 AM

    Comment: Whatever happened to make-my-day Cold War?

    Didn't Reagan, the great defense hero, melt down the Soviets with just one Hot War...a weekend run across the mighty nation of Grenada?

    After just 25 years of incompetence, the Iranians nearly threw out the ayatollahs a few years back.

    Hot War plays to the insurgents' strength. Cold War plays to ours. As we dance to their tune, Reagan rolls over in his grave.

  • Posted By: Lilyfun @ 02/23/2008 8:31:17 PM

    Comment: To Tyler Durden: I believe you mean OSAMA -not- ???"Obama"???.

  • Posted By: Lilyfun @ 02/23/2008 8:30:12 PM

    Comment: To Tyler Durden: It's "Osama" -not- "Obama".

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:20:06 PM

    Comment: X.
    Obama may talk about ???change,??? but Michael Hirsch is right. The biggest change of all would be facing that fact that America has already been changed drastically by the Bush administration???s ???War on Terror.??? We???re already off in a completely new direction. Congress no longer declares war. The whole world is our enemy, if the President says so. Instead of cooperating with sovereign nations to fight terrorist groups, we declare them enemies, bomb them, and invade them. Especially if they have oil. Journalists are ???embedded??? with the invading troops and told what to report. The President decides which parts of laws he will follow and which he won???t.
    We???ve seen what happens by pursuing the War on Terror.
    Why not try pursing the Peace of Common Sense?

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:18:59 PM

    Comment: IX.
    Two weeks later, on October 7th, the USA unleashed its military power on the hapless country of Afghanistan. Not Saudi Arabia, where both Osama and the big majority of 9/11 hijackers were really from, but helpless, dirt-poor Afghanistan. True to the President???s promise, these were ???dramatic attacks, visible on TV.??? And the media covered them with red-white-and-blue flags. Bombs bursting in air, our flag was still there. Obama, however, wasn???t there. He was allowed to escape.
    Then, on October 26, the USA P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act was passed by a Congress that almost unanimously rubber-stamped it without reading it.
    And, as anyone who???s paying attention now knows, the Cheney/Bush administration had already begun its plans to move its ???war on terror??? into Iraq. Of course that took another year to get going. But it???ll be six years any day now, and it???s pretty damn clear that all the ???war on terror??? has brought Iraq, not peace and stability, but only more war, and more terror.

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:16:47 PM

    Comment: VIII.
    America, on offense! All over the world! For ever and ever! You could just see it shining in his eyes. Everything had changed. A week ago, he was a laughingstock, a candidate for one of the worst Presidents ever. Suddenly, everything had changed. Now - finally - he was a war president. And the war he had declared was the greatest war ever in the whole world. It belonged not just to America, but ???the whole civilized world.??? It was a war on terror itself. Our President was going to punish terror. Our President was going to answer terror.
    The very last questions in American minds, said the President was ???What is expected of us???? His answers: Live your lives, and hug your children. Be calm and resolute. Uphold the values of America. Support the victims. Cooperate with the FBI. Be patient with tighter security in the long struggle. Be confident in the economy. And pray.
    It was that speech, not 9/11, that ???changed everything.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:15:10 PM

    Comment: VII.
    And then our President threw down his famous gauntlet to the rest of the world. ???Every nation, in every region,??? he said, ???now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.???
    Our President apparently wanted it to be very clear that he taking not only our country, but the whole world, into new territory, uncharted waters. Our President had just given himself permission, a second time, to declare war, if necessary, on the whole rest of the world.
    He then mentioned, for the first time, the words ???Homeland Security.??? He set up Tom Ridge as the Homeland Security ???Czar.??? But, quickly said that defense wasn???t enough. American was going on offense. ???I have a message for our military,??? said our President. ???Be ready. I???ve called the Armed Forces to alert, and there is a reason. The hour is coming when America will act, and you will make us proud.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:12:58 PM

    Comment: VI.
    We were now in completely new territory, where the old rules - including the Constitution- were definitely out the window. Our President had not only just declared war, all by himself, on a single sovereign foreign country. He had also given himself permission to declare war on any other countries he wanted to, for as long as he wanted to. And it seemed that almost everyone in Congress was standing up and applauding.
    Having given the answer of endless, unlimited war to the first question he said Americans were asking, our President moved the second question he said we were asking: ???Why do they hate us???? His answer: ???they hate our freedoms.??? He linked them to fascism, Nazism, totalitarianism. And said they would be joining those lies in the grave of history.
    There were only two unanswered questions left in American minds. The next, said our President, was ???How ill we fight and win this war???? And immediately he repeated the ???endless??? theme. This new war wasn???t going to be like anything else in our history. It would go on and on. There would be ???dramatic strikes, visible on TV,??? but there would also be ???covert operations, secret even in success.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:09:59 PM

    Comment: V.
    This was no diplomatic offer, with a face-saving way the Taliban could respond to by saying they were against the taking of human life and would cooperate in finding the terrorists. It was a flat-out demonization of the Taliban and a declaration of war against them and their country. What our President was saying was, this was your fault, Taliban. It wasn???t just some terrorist weirdos. It was you. You did this. Your country. So from now on, your country???s ass is ours. Do whatever we say, exactly what we say, and exactly when we say it, or we???re going to bomb your country back into the stone age.
    In little more than a minute, the President had gone from America the Attacked to America the Attacker.
    And then, for the first time, came the phrase that has re-defined America ever since: ???the war on terror.???
    ???Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda,??? said the President,??? but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:04:31 PM

    Comment: IV.
    ???Americans have many questions tonight,??? said our President. ???Americans are asking: Who attacked our country???? And he pointed to Al Qaeda, using the word ???terrorist??? for the first time. Then he used the word ???terror,??? and ???terrorists,??? and ???the tactics of terror.??? He said they we hiding around the world, ???in places like Afghanistan,??? ???to plot evil and destruction.??? He said that Al Queda supported the Taliban regime. Then he said that the United States respects the people of Afghanistan, ???but we condemn the Taliban regime. He said that it was ???committing murder??? by aiding and abetting Al Quaeda. And then he started making demands on the government of this Afghanistan. A big list, a list ???not open to negotiation or discussion??? or that had to be done ???immediately.??? All Al Qaeda leaders had to be delivered to the US, all foreign nationals released, all journalists, diplomats and aid workers protected, every terrorist camp closed every single terrorist and every person in their support structure handed over, and the US given full access to all terrorist training camps. Or else. Or else ???they will share in their fate.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:01:36 PM

    Comment: III.
    The President then went positive for a bit, thanking the world for its support, saying we would never forget. He ended by thanking Tony Blair, who had ???crossed an ocean to show his unity of purpose with America.???
    Then he launched into a theme that has almost completely defined everything in American life ever since.
    First, he re-defined that the attack of 9/11 was ???an act of war.??? Not ???an act of terrorism,??? but ???an act of war.??? And he immediately started talking about all the other wars we???ve been through. This time, though, he said, it???s different. After 9/11, he said, ???night fell on a different world, a world where freedom itself is under attack.???
    This was entirely different from what we???d felt over the weekend. The energy he was evoking had nothing whatever to do with healing or rebuilding. This was about something very, very different.

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:01:13 PM

    Comment: III.
    The President then went positive for a bit, thanking the world for its support, saying we would never forget. He ended by thanking Tony Blair, who had ???crossed an ocean to show his unity of purpose with America.???
    Then he launched into a theme that has almost completely defined everything in American life ever since.
    First, he re-defined that the attack of 9/11 was ???an act of war.??? Not ???an act of terrorism,??? but ???an act of war.??? And he immediately started talking about all the other wars we???ve been through. This time, though, he said, it???s different. After 9/11, he said, ???night fell on a different world, a world where freedom itself is under attack.???
    This was entirely different from what we???d felt over the weekend. The energy he was evoking had nothing whatever to do with healing or rebuilding. This was about something very, very different.

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 5:00:27 PM

    Comment: II.
    That hit me in my gut. What our President was saying to the nation, and to the listening world, was that the distinction between bringing our enemies to justice, and bringing justice to our enemies - didn???t matter. On the surface, as just words, it seemed almost harmless, just a changing around of the order of the words. But in our guts, everyone knew exactly where he was going with this. By making that distinction irrelevant, he was equating justice with revenge. The kind of ???justice??? that comes from gun barrels and missile launchers. He was saying, all rules are off the table. We???re gonna string up the bad guys. And whether we give ???em a trial or not first - that doesn???t matter. My stomach started turning over.
    Within two sentences, he was talking about the $40 billion that Americans had given in response to 9/11. He called it money ???to rebuild our communities??? - but then he tacked on another phrase - ???and meet the needs of our military.???

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 4:59:54 PM

    Comment: I.
    I remember Tuesday, September 9. 2001, and I remember the days after. My community, Staten Island, was very hard hit. We lost about 270 people. But in the days after 9/11, the shock and grief were met by a tremendous positive community spirit of help, healing, cooperation, and rebuilding. Over the weekend, churches and community groups held special services and gatherings where this spirit was palpable. It really seemed that a greater good was going to come out of the evil that had been done to us. And if Staten Island could bring good out of this evil, so could all of New York City, and the nation.
    Then, on Thursday September 20th, President Bush went on TV and addressed the nation with a speech that changed everything. He began by saying that ???the state of the union is strong,??? and immediately followed that by calling us a country ???awakened to danger and called to defend freedom.??? ???Our grief,??? he said, ???has turned to anger.??? Not healing, but anger. Anger at our enemies. Then he said ???Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.???

    • Posted By: cece.borjeson @ 02/28/2008 12:46:39

      Comment: Tyler - are you also an obsessiver talker when you can't find a key-board? Anyone that needs a dozen posts to make their point is beyond help. PS: Hillary was spoofing Obama's stump-speech style. It had nothing to do with blasphemy. You need to work on two parts of your anatomy: zip your lip, and develop a funny-bone. Sheesh !!!!!

  • Posted By: elfriede1 @ 02/23/2008 4:46:40 PM

    Comment: I have to agree that by referring to our hunting down of Al-Qaeda as the War on Terror by this President a real disservice has been done to the American people. By dumping any and every group of people that we don't agree with including Al-Qaeda together this president has done a great disservice to the future of this country. There is no doubt that our quarrel is with Al-Qaeda and not with everybody else in the Muslim world. This war will never end as such, and any body that proposes differently will be lynched or destroyed.
    We do have a lynch mentality. Yes, somebody like Obama could try and rationalize this problem. But, lets be frank, with the existing ignorance about these matters in America he would never make it to the presidency. I think that because of this that we will continue in this war for many years to come. And the conservatives will be happy to continue it. The cost, well, as long as the taxes to the very wealthy continue to be cut at the expense of the middle and low income classes things will continue as is. Too bad. Things could be different if everybody would pause and use their little grey cells.

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 1:57:11 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 1:56:37 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: Tyler Durden @ 02/23/2008 1:54:23 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: aintwegotfun @ 02/23/2008 11:52:59 AM

    Comment: Someone please answer this question. O'Bama's mother was a white woman from Kansas. She married a black man that was an islamist. He deserted her and her son. She then married another black man that was also an islamist. This is all we know. The second husband also left her and her son. She then raised him alone with his grandmother. She is now deceased. Why do we not know more about O'Bama's mother? Plainly she must have been the most influential person in his life & in his formative years. But she remains a mystery. O'Bama says nothing about her & the media does not either. Why do we know so much about both Clinton's families and their up bringing and nearly none about his? Wouldn"t this help us know him better?

    • Posted By: lamm01 @ 02/26/2008 17:08:27

      Comment: Because if he speak sof his mother he has to reiterate how he hates "his mother's people" and we can't have white voters knowing that, can we? It would ruin the illusion of the uniter not divider.

  • Posted By: getzel @ 02/23/2008 10:30:09 AM

    Comment: Research indicates there are 3, maybe 4 if you include congressmen, specific types of people that support PINKObumer.

    1. Hate themselves, and of course proclaim it is others that hate.
    2. Hate others, and of course proclaim it is others that hate.
    3. Most prevalent group: UDOPIANS: Characterized by bizarre manifestations of HOPE and CHANGE according to each individuals individual fantasy of utopia. UDOPIANS have the same side effects, not unlike alcoholics or drug addicts, they are in denial as to reality: that HOPE and CHANGE mean nothing; and yet those with UDOPIA feel HOPE & CHANGE means whatever they fanaticize it means. Each has the same basic politically correct response to those who try and point out they have UDOPIAN simplex: you are a neo-con or you hate or other similar politically correct accusations of the day. Someone points out: OBUMER you have UDOPIAN simplex: I see all the red flags of UDOPIA; same delusional HOPE for CHANGE answer every time.
    4. Congressmen, & their workers, who think PINKObumer is their: 4 more years of pork barrel: free meal ticket for their districts; no leadership with a clue to control congressional out of control spending.= easy re-election.

  • Posted By: aintwegotfun @ 02/23/2008 10:15:09 AM

    Comment: Someone please answer this question. O'Bama's mother was a white woman from Kansas. She married a black man that was an islamist. He deserted her and her son. She then married another black man that was also an islamist. This is all we know. The second husband also left her and her son. She then raised him alone with his grandmother. She is now deceased. Why do we not know more about O'Bama's mother? Plainly she must have been the most influential person in his life & in his formative years. But she remains a mystery. O'Bama says nothing about her & the media does not either. Why do we know so much about both Clinton's families and their up bringing and nearly none about his? Wouldn"t this help us know him better?

    • Posted By: bwlib @ 02/26/2008 13:47:53

      Comment: Obama's mother died at the age of 53 from cancer and struggled with medical expenses to cover her treatment. She had only two children, Barack and his sister. She earned a PhD and still managed to educate both her children in top schools. Her first husband, Barack's father, was born a moslem as many Kenyans in his part of Kenya are born but he attended Catholic school and converted to Catholism. I do not know why this never reaches the mainstream media. His African tradition allowed him to have more than one wife (remember Africa has 54 countries and thousands of traditions so not every town/country practices the same form of Christianity, Islam nor ethnic tradition). 1950's-60's Islam in Eastern Africa isn't necessarily today's Middle Eastern/Arabic nor East Asian radical Islam per se. His father got a scholarship to U. of Hawaii and met and married Barack's mother in undergrad. He left her to go to Harvard to get his PhD in economics then went back to make a name for himself in Kenya and continued a life with an informal Kenyan wife (as I understand it). Arguably, in the 1970's, he saw his future as a black foreign man as being better in Kenya (his home) than in the U.S. Barack'ss mother married not another black man but an Indonesian (Asian) man and went to Indonesia at one point to follow her husband. When that marriage dissolved, she returned to Hawaii with Barack who was still a boy and with her daughter from that second marriage. Today that sister, who looks South Pacific Asian, lives in Hawaii and is married with a child or so and campaigns for Barack. His father died around the mid-1980's in a car accident and he'd only spent time with Barack from Barack's birth until he was two yrs old and then for one month when Barack was 10 yrs old. The father spent that vacation living with Barack, his mother and both grandparents before returning to Kenya. There was a recent documentary on Barack's life on CNN and MSNBC covering all this and more printed articles (google it). Barack always mentions how difficult it was to be a young man watching his mother try to negotiate bills while dealing with cancer at age 53. She apparently used to wake him up at about 4am most school mornings to eat breakfast, read and do add'l school work; he has her to thank for his education, discipline, diction, eloquence and ability to communicate articulately.

  • Posted By: morangles @ 02/23/2008 9:38:33 AM

    Comment: beats me how many intelligent people wheter politicians or journalists of whaterver western nation miss the point about what is happening since those last 15ys. What we are witnessing whether in Israel; Iran, Pakistan and even Huckabee bid is the religious version of Custer last stand. Religious , not as a fight for faith, but a fight of religious nomenklatura to keep political power to wield political power. Who in his/her right mind is discussing the intricaties of catholicism, Islam or Sikhism. No one disputes the other's faith or lack of it. It is a personal matter; rather we see the Pope, the archbishop of Canterbury, the Mullahs etc putting their pudgt finger into the polittical pie and stealing it. The Iranian Prez can , for all my blessing, believe in the holy powers of Onions if he wishes too, no problem by me, but that he should find normal to relinquish his poltical independance to a group of people who for only achievement have grown beards and kneel 7 times a daytoward Mecca is plainly wrong. This is the onslaught of unproven faith against proven science, proven math, proven facts. Jesus, a strong one for neocons , and a strong one for the Pope and myself incidentally saif to keep apart Caesar and God. Hucabee wants to change our constition to make it christian forgetting the Orthdoxs,Jews, non-believers, Buddhists etc of our great nation. This is no war on terror, this a war against secularism, against tolerance. When I'll see , you, remind us that the war on terror is that religious fanatics called them islamofascists or christian nutballs have started against any nation who believes that politics is the salve of faith. This is no war on terror, this is war against freedom of speech, freedom of belief.

  • Posted By: smatei @ 02/23/2008 7:42:47 AM

    Comment: "the group has never come close to duplicating 9/11; even the train bombings in London and Madrid that were attributed to Al Qaeda-inspired cells were minor by comparison." Shouldn't the war on terror be in fact directly credited for this relative inactivity? This commentary would make sense if there was a way to measure what the effect of a policy of passivity would've been. Until then, the proof of the pie is in eating it.

  • Posted By: smatei @ 02/23/2008 7:40:31 AM

    Comment: "the group has never come close to duplicating 9/11; even the train bombings in London and Madrid that were attributed to Al Qaeda-inspired cells were minor by comparison." Shouldn't the war on terror be directly credited for this?

  • Posted By: Mwalimu @ 02/23/2008 12:10:58 AM

    Comment: If you have been reading recent issues of Jeune Afrique. (And advantage to speaking French), you'd notice a concern about the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in the Maghreb. (A recent issue featured a very revealing article about the training of suicide bombers in Algeria.) According to journalists writing for Jeune Afrique, Islamic fundamentalsim is spreading for two reasons. First of all, the American occupation of Iraq; secondly, the soaring poverty and unemployment in many cities in the Arab world.

    Obama has one big trump card. He appeals to the young. Afrique Magazine and Jeune Afrique have already written about him. (Afrique Magazine labels him America's best hope.) Most terrorists are young. Much of the Islamic world, including Iran, is young. We cannot, I repeat, we cannot defeat terrorism by military means. McCain's solution to terrorism -= namely :bomb Iran" will only increase the appeal of Islamic Fundamentlaism. We can end or contain terrorism only if we do the following. First, find some way to leave Iraq. Secondly, eliminate or reduce the socio-economic conditions that breed terrroism. Thirdly, we need to cut the funding source - mainly oil revenues (much of it flowing through Saudi Arabia). We need to seriously develop green technology I might add that we could increase wealth in the Middle East by sharing green technology with them. (Even Abu Dubai recognizes that the wealth of oil will not last forever.) I would urge Obama to initiate this debate. I believe his background provides makes him highly qualified to understand these issues. We need to intiate change in the way we fight terrorism.

  • Posted By: marketingtruth @ 02/22/2008 8:29:53 PM

    Comment: People who complain that Barack Obama lacks experience must be unaware of his legislative achievements. One reason these accomplishments are unfamiliar is that the media have not devoted enough attention to Obama's bills and the effort required to pass them, ignoring impressive, hard evidence of his character and ability.

    Since most of Obama's legislation was enacted in Illinois, most of the evidence is found there -- and it has been largely ignored by the media in a kind of Washington snobbery that assumes state legislatures are not to be taken seriously. (Another factor is reporters' fascination with the horse race at the expense of substance that they assume is boring, a fascination that despite being ridiculed for years continues to dominate political journalism.)

    I am a rarity among Washington journalists in that I have served in a state legislature. I know from my time in the West Virginia legislature that the challenges faced by reform-minded state representatives are no less, if indeed not more, formidable than those encountered in Congress. For me, at least, trying to deal with those challenges involved as much drama as any election. And the "heart and soul" bill, the one for which a legislator gives everything he or she has to get passed, has long told me more than anything else about a person's character and ability.
    By Charles Peter

  • Posted By: redd_green @ 02/22/2008 6:04:01 PM

    Comment: Re:

    Posted By: ObamaMama @ 02/22/2008 5:04:38 PM
    Comment: A continued worldwide effort to expose radical terror cells and extremists, expose plots BEFORE they are executed, requires international co-operation, intelligence sharing, INTERPOL plus. For the good of the world, I believe all countries will choose to strengthen these efforts. I believe President Obama will encourage and strengthen international participation of such goals. War is NOT a requirement for world co-operation that protects the BROTHERHOOD OF MAN.
    ===================================================
    Our "government" was sitting in the Pentagon, watching 09/11 unfold, and told the military to stand down. Watch Manetta's testimony. Then read the documents on the PNAC web site. It will make you sick.


  • Posted By: redd_green @ 02/22/2008 6:02:33 PM

    Comment: if terror was that big a deal, then Bush would have killed his daddy's best friends kid, Osama Bin Laden. Bush let him get away, then 6 months after 09/11, said "he's not that big a deal" on television for everyone to see. The Bushs got what they want: lots of military all over Iraq, to help out his buddies in oil and lucrative government contracting business. Its a gross insult to anyone with 1/4 of a brain to call it a "war on terror". War for terror is a better description.

  • Posted By: gon16 @ 02/22/2008 6:02:00 PM

    Comment: i live in a state that is voting pretty soon, and haven't made up my mind about who to vote for, i'd like to hear people's opinions about what the world will think about following someone like Obama vs someone like HRC. how confident are people that either one can truly stop the 'war on terror'? i assume they'd try to apeal to the UN for support while we get out of IRAQ. which one would inspire more worldwide cooperation?

  • Posted By: gon16 @ 02/22/2008 6:00:14 PM

    Comment: i live in a state that is voting pretty soon, and haven't made up my mind about who to vote for, i'd like to hear people's opinions about what the world will think about following someone like Obama vs someone like HRC. how confident are people that either one can truly stop the 'war on terror'? i assume they'd try to apeal to the UN for support while we get out of IRAQ. which one would inspire more worldwide cooperation?

  • Posted By: az_prof @ 02/22/2008 5:19:33 PM

    Comment: Sjones writes below: "We'll abandon our allies and try cut deals with dictators instead of supporting democracy. " Is he talking about Senator Obama or President Reagan who cut deals with Iran (Iran-Contra) and who at the same time supplies Osama bin Laden and Al Quaeda with troops to fight the Russians in Afganistan--who also supported Saddaam Hussein in his war against Iran?

    Senator Obama represents new ideas and an engagement with the world that is not Emperial. It is about time because after eight years of Bush-Cheney we don't have many allies left in the world.

  • Posted By: ObamaMama @ 02/22/2008 5:04:38 PM

    Comment: A continued worldwide effort to expose radical terror cells and extremists, expose plots BEFORE they are executed, requires international co-operation, intelligence sharing, INTERPOL plus. For the good of the world, I believe all countries will choose to strengthen these efforts. I believe President Obama will encourage and strengthen international participation of such goals. War is NOT a requirement for world co-operation that protects the BROTHERHOOD OF MAN.

  • Posted By: sjones_1 @ 02/22/2008 5:01:56 PM

    Comment: I have very little confidence in Barack Obama. The man is an utterly untested former state Senator. I went to the Ivy League too, trust me it means nothing. He's handsome and charming. So is the guy who does the local news in every town across the country. So is the guy who sells you a used car. He's gone off the deep end on foreign policy. Where he hasn't boxed himself into a corner on promising to withdraw our military, he's overcommitting us by trying to seem macho. An Obama Presidency would consist of standard Democratic economics -- tax the rich, cut down on trade to protect domestic manufacturers. If he succeeds in making us high tax isolationists our economy stalls. If he fails to deliver on all his overblown "hope" and promises he simply poisons the well by blaming Republicans for his failures. Either way its a recipe for failure and stagnation. And his foreign policy represents an America in decline. We'll abandon our allies and try cut deals with dictators instead of supporting democracy. All grim stuff. Look, the Iraq war will stabilize. Iraq, simply, has oil. That alone gives it the strength to succeed provided a reasonable amount of continued support from us. McCain seems to be the man for the moment. He can work with Democrats. He can get independants. He was right all along strategically about getting enough forces into Iraq. McCain seems to be a guy we can be proud of in office with his rational centered pricipled politics. Obama's brand of populism is going to flare out one way or another.

  • Posted By: az_prof @ 02/22/2008 4:56:41 PM

    Comment: It would be foolish for Obama to make the arguments made in this piece in the campaign in such a direct manner; most Americans simply cannot understand these nuances. After all, most Americans still do not even know that Saddam Hussein and Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. Most Americans understand very little about Islam and even less about its sectarian and tribal divisions. However, Senator Obama has suggested that he understands the issues raised in this article: he talks about a new emphasis on diplomacy; he talks about the need for America to hold ourselves to the highest ideals and morals in our dealings with other countries and so he would immediately end torture and close Guantanamo; he talks about how the war in Iraq diverted America from the real enemy--Al Quaeda and Osama bin Laden; he talks about extending an offer to open up lines of communication with old enemies as a way to win them to our way of life, rather than ignoring them and building walls of separation. I think in short, he HAS indicated that his foreign policy would be different, without directly speaking about the War on Terror itself as something that is illusionary and unnecessary, an argument which would not be effective.

  • Posted By: shazomar @ 02/22/2008 4:48:08 PM

    Comment: to the writer....so true...never mind Iraq..end this war on terror!

  • Posted By: Jack3213 @ 02/22/2008 4:40:52 PM

    Comment: ATLEAST THE MCCAIN'S CAN BE CONSIDERED PATRIOTIC IN THE FULLEST SENSE OF THE WORD, ATLEAST THEY SALUTE THE FLAG WITH HANDS OVER THEIR HEARTS- AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN PROUD OF THE USA.THE CLINTONS ARE NOTHING BUT TWO BIT LIARS, ALWAYS WERE, ALWAYS WILL BE.

    • Posted By: lamm01 @ 02/26/2008 17:11:10

      Comment: Excuse me but isn't it Obama who will not hold his hand over his heart during the national athem. Have they not always been proud of America? I think that you have your candidates and their spouses mixed up. It must be because Obama tries to hard to be white....

  • Posted By: concernedcitizen69 @ 02/22/2008 4:35:54 PM

    Comment: Very nice article. On point, and well thought-out. I agree 100% that Bush and Co. used 9/11 as an excuse to drag the U.S. into costly, unproductive conflicts with Iraq and alienation with other allies. The bottom line is that we need to stop pretending Iraq is part of the war on terror, and actually have a targeted, precise, and well-thought out approach to this problem that involves a lot more real diplomacy that what we've seen over the last few years.

    And the other thing I like about your article is that you see, as I do, that we are giving these thugs too much credit and only giving them exactly what we want when we elevate them to some type of worldwide diabolical status. It's time to become ruthless, but surgical, in our dealings with these people, instead of wasting billions and billions of dollars and lining the pockets of contractors to fight useless wars that don't accomplish any real objectives.

  • Posted By: merihart @ 02/22/2008 4:19:52 PM

    Comment: Terrorism cannot be addressed except by attempted world-wide totalitarianism, a remedy worse than the disease. I would rather take my chances with isolated instances of terrorism than to be subjected to world-wide totalitarianism.

  • Posted By: Suspicious Minds @ 02/22/2008 3:53:29 PM

    Comment: Yes, the president of change ... as in "Gimme all your change, I need it all for the 642 new 'PROGRAMS' to help all you misguided folks find your way down the righteous path to socialist reform." Let's all make a circle, hold hands and sing Kumbaya. As the great philosopher Charlie Brown said "Arrrrrrghhhh!"

    • Posted By: jeanette713 @ 02/23/2008 10:57:11

      Comment: I agree wholeheartedly

  • Posted By: Voice_Of_Reason @ 02/22/2008 3:34:57 PM

    Comment: I love how this column is used as a platform from which someone can launch their own personal views into the public eye, with the intent to shape public opinion rather than reflect it - just another in the life of the drive-by media. The fact is, 9/11 wasn't one lucky day of mass murder by ragged America-haters, but rather the result of an entire era where America was the object of hate. Obviously since something of that scale hasn't occurred since then, we are doing something right. Do you honestly think that the reason we haven't had another attack on American soil since 9/11 is coincidence? I mean, let's be real here.
    Global warming? Please. Even if this myth had some credible evidence to support it, there is nothing man can do to stop it. The fact is, it's all one big meteorological cycle, and considering most of the temperatures this year are lower than the ones last year, I'd venture to say the cycle is on it's way back to "normal".
    Please, if you're going to make accusations about our intentions, at least try to put your evidence in perspective.

  • Posted By: Ken_e_p @ 02/22/2008 3:21:14 PM

    Comment: Why does every viewpoint have to be made in reference to some less distasteful process ie "annihilation" of a group of people "like" killing an insect. If you take what your talking about into your belly indiscriminately killing EVERY member, ie annihilating, of a group who ill grant you are themselves extremist dont you become a little like them. I eat my words now by alluding to your metaphor but I never admired a guy who lost his cool because an insect stung him and reacted by deciding all bees where killer bees ie the natural consequence of being stung too many times and that a process of annihilation was the only or most judicious answer
    by a US friendly European

  • Posted By: monkeyview @ 02/22/2008 2:47:17 PM

    Comment:
    9/11 is like a bad bee sting to a mighty giant. If the
    giant jumps up and out of the 7th story window ... the bad bee succeeded.
    If the giant has the sense to kill the bee and then call the exterminatorsI must say that I totally agree with this article.
    We must not overreact to events and we must proceed on an even
    keel as a country.

    9/11 is like a bad bee sting to a mighty giant. If the
    giant jumps up and out of the 7th story window ... the bad bee succeeded.
    If the giant has the sense to kill the bee and then call the exterminators
    to remove the bee hive then the problem is solved.

    Only America can badly hurt itself by overreacting.
    And I believe that is what the bad guys are counting on.

    Paul

    to remove the bee hive then the problem is solved.

    Only A

  • Posted By: monkeyview @ 02/22/2008 2:45:44 PM

    Comment: I must say that I totally agree with this article. We must not over react to events and
    we must proceed on an even keel. 9/11 is like a bad bee sting to a mighty giant. If the
    giant jumps up and out of the 7th story window ... the bad bee succeeded. If the giant
    kills the bee and then calls the exterminators to root out the hive then the problem is solved. Only America can badly hurt itself by over reacting.
    9/11 type events can never bring America down.

    Paul

  • Posted By: LesMatheson0 @ 02/22/2008 2:45:13 PM

    Comment: The "war on terror" is and always has been a convenient Maypole on which our "leaders" can hang their rally banners. It's colorful and frightening, and spins in ways which enthrall our attention -- that way we won't notice the near bankruptcy of leadership on all other topics. Fearmongering is the 2nd-down punt of small-minded politicians. Your remarks are right on target.

  • Posted By: SeventhSon @ 02/22/2008 2:30:36 PM

    Comment: Following prostate cancer radiation I changed my underwear from tighty-whities to colored boxers. If you give me Sentator Obama's address, I can send him the whites so he doesn't have to go to the expense of buying a surrender flag. If you believe that the radical Islamists agenda is not to either convert the West to Islam or kill them, then you might want to have your Kool Aid handy if there is a President Obama or Clinton.

  • Posted By: ThoughtfulLiz-E @ 02/22/2008 2:21:06 PM

    Comment: Wow, that was a racist comment if I ever saw one. I am really sorry that Obama didn't get a nice Christian name from his caucasian master like us African Americans who were enslaved. Get over yourselves! Obama is no more of a terrorist than George W. Bush or Hillary Cilnton. Let's debate the real issues and stick to using both sides of our brains.

    • Posted By: wakeuppeople @ 02/22/2008 15:57:32

      Comment: Thoughtful Liz-E, I think it's time that ignoratn race-baiters like you, racist anti-semite Farrakhan and Jesse Jackass all shut your mouths. YOU WERE NEVER A SLAVE AND NEITHER WERE EITHER OF YOUR PARENTS!!! So shut up about it! The Jews have been enslaved for thousands of years longing than SOME African's were, and i don't see THEM bitching and moaning! Get over it, move on, and stop race-baiting!!!

  • Posted By: keepyourname @ 02/22/2008 2:14:05 PM

    Comment: Yeah, sounds like a great idea. Lets put Barack Hussein Obama in charge of our foreign affairs and middle east relations. Right now the vast majority of his supporters are acting like he's on American Idol. Maybe by November we will all be able to text our presdential vote in. WAKE UP

    • Posted By: Dave in NM @ 02/22/2008 14:26:40

      Comment: I agree. It IS a great idea! Thanks for supporting the Obama campaign, and I also agree that voting should be more widely available. Oh - you were just being another racist idiot making hay of Sen. Obama's middle name? What's yours? Adolph?

      • Posted By: wakeuppeople @ 02/22/2008 16:08:35

        Comment: What's the problem there Davey? Can't handle it when someone points out FACTS instead making stating dumbass opinions like you? Obama's black father ran out on him and only his white mother stuck around to raise him. That is NOT a racist comment, it is just a FACT! That's all people like you are good at, bitching and feeling sorry for yourselves. Take a look in the mirror, the only racist people on this blog are you and Liz-E! Hypocrites.

      • Posted By: wakeuppeople @ 02/22/2008 16:01:42

        Comment: Easy there genius. It's not racist to call someone by their full name. His just happens to be Barack HUSSEIN Obama! Talk about racist, to call a white man Adolph is also racist! So before you go to your next white-hatin' rally with Louis Farrakhan or Jesse Jackass, take a look in the mirror before you call someone else racist. Oh, and do you find it interesting that Obama's black father fran out on him and he was raised by his white mother? Again, you can call that racist, but it IS just STATING A FACT!!!

        • Posted By: wakeuppeople @ 02/22/2008 16:11:10

          Comment: Oh, and by the way, just in case you're wondering, I'm 1/2 Spanish, 1/2 Puerto Rican, and a Democrat. It's people like you that give the rest of the party a bad name. Stop acting like sheeple and wake up!

  • Posted By: keepyourname @ 02/22/2008 2:09:59 PM

    Comment: Yeah, sounds like a great idea. Lets put Barack Hussein Obama in charge of our foreighn affairs and middle east relations. Right now the vast majority of his supporters are acting like he's on American Idol. Maybe by November we will all be able to text our presdential vote in. WAKE UP

  • Posted By: Simonsez99 @ 02/22/2008 1:55:31 PM

    Comment: You had better saddle up Mr. Hirsh, we have barely seen the openning shot in the War on Terror. And that is the crux of theproblem. We have been treating it for so long as a policing action, that we left ourselves open for 9/11 to happen (and are still doing so in a myriad of ways). As other commentors have stated, how do you explain attacks in Argentina, Malaysia, India, Yemen, Kenya, Germany, Spain and the UK to just name a few? The Radical Islamists are treating this as a world wide war and we had better treat is as such too or we will just be added to ash heap of history when the next 9/11 happens. Thanks for your pontificating, lousy advice from up on high, but you can keep it. I'd rather have them worrying about the next airstrike or special forces raid than plotting the next 9/11.

    • Posted By: jaymiller @ 02/22/2008 14:02:03

      Comment: Simon, I am a hard core Democrat and I could not agree with you more.

  • Posted By: Simonsez99 @ 02/22/2008 1:43:01 PM

    Comment: Name one other world wide movement that we need to fear? (crickets chirping..) That's right, there aren't any except for radical islam. From the US, to Argentina, to Malaysia, to India, to Israel, to Kenya, to Yemen, to Germany, to Spain, to England, they are the one group responsible for terror attrocities on a worldwide scale. Safe havens need to be removed, moderate muslims need to be engaged and we need to stay focused on the fact that this is not just a simple retaliation for 9/11. 9/11 simply focused our attention to the fact that treating radical islam as a policing action was no longer a working solution.

    This 'autor' is an apologist and self-flagilator willing live in a world where you don't know if you will be safe going to the mall this weekend. I'd much rather have them worried more about when the next airstrike will drop or when the next Army, Marine, or SF unit is going to ruin their day than planning another terror mission in my backyard.

  • Posted By: rdbrenneman @ 02/22/2008 1:30:37 PM

    Comment: By giving a title of "war" to a group of criminals we have elevated their importance in the psyche of average americans. The act perpetrated on 9/11 was an act of cowardice which should have been treated as a police action with our full attention devoted to capturing and destroying those who perpetrated the act. We have undermined the stability of an entire region incumbered ourselves and our children with a huge debt and sent our enconomy into tail spin from the huberias of a doctrine that is impossible to acheive.

  • Posted By: cooglewitz @ 02/22/2008 1:27:30 PM

    Comment: One lucky day? Hirsh did you Forget about, Twin Towers in 93, The Cole, Beirut, Spain, England, Bali, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, The Embassies, Lockerbie, Chechnia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq. Thats like saying the Nazi's had one lucky run of genocide , but it won't happen again somewhere else. You need to go back and study history, but more important journalism.

  • Posted By: piinalu @ 02/22/2008 1:07:10 PM

    Comment: "Let's think about this for a moment. A small group of ragged America-haters, who had one lucky day of mass murder nearly seven years ago, will continue to define the foreign policy of the lone superpower for years, possibly decades to come."

    I have little respect for President Bush's performance in foreign policy, but that statement seems even more off base. As does the implication that we can't do more than one thing at the time. The other issues listed are all legitimate, but they don't require us to do them one at a time in a linear sequence.

    Sorry, but the premise of this piece is weak.

  • Posted By: owlish @ 02/22/2008 12:51:33 PM

    Comment: Terror is what happens within each one of us when faced with unexpected violence and fear. Hitler and the Nazis would appropriately be called terrorists, and they were Christians. The Third Reich was vanquished by a targeted and unified approach, not by calling them Christianofascists. The Japanese Empire created terrorists, but that war wasn???t won by denigrating their religion or their race. Our country brought shame on ourselves by the internment camps that lumped all Japanese together. The ???terrorists??? who attacked our country on 9/11 were Saudis, not Afghanis or Iraqis. There are still many unresolved mysteries about 9/11 that have yet to be brought to journalistic light. This is a war for power and resources, like nearly every other war. Will a war on mental illness stop future Virginia Tech tragedies? The war on drugs hasn???t stopped drug trafficking. We need a new approach.
    I agree, Buckeye Scott: GO OBAMA!!!

  • Posted By: a simpleton high school teacher @ 02/22/2008 12:51:12 PM

    Comment: Filipinos, Central Americans, Vietnamese, and countless others might ask if we ever consistently stood for self determination.

  • Posted By: owlish @ 02/22/2008 12:44:52 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: Buckeye State Scott @ 02/22/2008 12:35:15 PM

    Comment: I agree we will always be threatened by a few, but have no need to declare an endless war.

    Buckeye Scott

    Go OBAMA

  • Posted By: dentoy @ 02/22/2008 11:53:13 AM

    Comment: I have always felt that the "War on Terror" is a ridiculous description of what should rightly be called the "War on Islamic extremism". "Terror" is a tactic, much like airial bombing or trench warfare. There are plenty of people, including our own home grown fanatics who use terror as a tactic.

    • Posted By: miamiman @ 02/22/2008 11:56:38

      Comment: 9/11 wasnt terror sir? the bombing of the uss cole or the embassy in kenya also? the attack on the marine barracks in Lebanon? the taking of hostages for 400+ days in Iran? What is terror to you? a universal studios thrill ride?

  • Posted By: miamiman @ 02/22/2008 11:50:00 AM

    Comment: the posters have it wrong. Christianity attempts peaceful conversion whereas the islamic extremist seek to force conversion to their religion as their religion is to them all encompassing. remember it is us non islamics that are considered "infidels" . This will not change as it has not througout the history of both religions. There is no denying that Christianity is based on peaceful ways and extremist Islam is based on ANY means including violence which doesnt shy away from purposeful killing of innocents.

    Get over it people we didnt start this "war on terror". people forget easily the horror of 9/11 and the feeling of insecurity it created. a feeling that persists to this very day. you cannot end this age old conflict of beliefs with a wave of your hand and anyone who believes this is naive at best.

    • Posted By: cleareyed @ 02/25/2008 17:18:11

      Comment: Yes, Christianity is based on peaceful ways but the most vocal "so called evangelical christians"or right wing republicans are some of the most blood thirsty, nasty, mean people I have ever seen who represent themselves as Christian.

    • Posted By: manny_23 @ 02/22/2008 13:45:16

      Comment: how wrong you are!!!! the U.S. started the war. they always try to make it look like they are thevictims when in reality they are the ones that kill and manipilate other goverments so that they can get what they want. Or do you still believe that teh war on Iraq was actually to defend the iraqui from Saddam. It was for the oil!!!!

      • Posted By: sawmetal @ 02/22/2008 15:39:33

        Comment: YES it was about oil!!! The money oil brings to buy weapons!!! which was what Saddam was using it for and would have used it for on an international scale!!1 DO YOU THINK A COUNTRY WITHOUT MONEY COULD BE AGGERSIVE TOWARDS ITS NEIGHBORS WITHOUT THE OIL INCOME!!

  • Posted By: deb123 @ 02/22/2008 10:38:38 AM

    Comment: At last! The idea won't win an election today, but perhaps -- just maybe -- it will find its way into the American consciousness with a boost from secure leadership at the top. The time has come.

  • Posted By: BeanGuy @ 02/21/2008 10:17:23 PM

    Comment: This may just be the most idiotic thought ever uttered. Your kidding right? You think that the terrorists are just a couple of rag tag idiots? Do you not remember the USS Cole, embassies in Africa, the Marine quarters in Lebenon? Good Lord ,sir. How can someone as naive as you earn a living as a "deep thinker?" If anything, this war against us ought to be expanded to include the entire cult of Islam. After all, in case you haven't noticed, they've already declared war on us.

    • Posted By: Dave in NM @ 02/22/2008 11:06:42

      Comment: As long as you can't distinguish between Islam and terrorism, you can't propose a course of action that will do anything but weaken this country further. Unfortunately, it appears we'll be mired in this situation until the "cult of Christianity" gets the flick over itself. Stop trying to convert the world to your religion, and you'll see a sharp reduction in the world's wanting to convert us to cinders.

    • Posted By: PROUDOFUSA @ 02/22/2008 09:46:52

      Comment: YOU ARE SIR, 100% CORRECT

  • Posted By: karena @ 02/21/2008 9:20:10 PM

    Comment: You cannot address a citizen of America who is not, nor has not been president of this country the title of "President"

    I plan to forward this to every media medium to show your abuse and lack of respect to America!!!!

    • Posted By: kirktc_487 @ 02/21/2008 23:12:12

      Comment: Under our constitution you can and do call anyone what you like, you can even lie knowing it for a lie. I thought he showed some insight with his byline, but I wonder where he picked his "story" up from, ya think he could be one of those secret forum bloggers we've had to deal with?

  • Posted By: Paul07086 @ 02/21/2008 9:15:55 PM

    Comment: http://www.911truth.org
    http://patriotsquestion911.com
    http://www.911weknow.com
    This is the Truth about 9/11... we got so many enemies, inside and outside of our beautiful Country!!!

  • Posted By: Paul07086 @ 02/21/2008 9:09:48 PM

    Comment: www.911truth.org
    www.911mysteries.com

    This is the Truth about 9/11... we got so many enemies, inside and outside of our beautiful Country!!!

  • Posted By: wilsan @ 02/21/2008 8:10:22 PM

    Comment: This is another brainless writing by Mr. Hirsh, the man that is not aware of the Khmer Rouge, or labor camps in Vietnam. And, he's missed the mark again.

    The war on terror was ended by another president; Bill Clinton. Pity the successor to any president that 'ends' it again... and the country that suffers the consequences.

  • Posted By: marketingtruth @ 02/21/2008 7:46:17 PM

    Comment: Comment: Hillary Clinton Goofs Again
    A Commentary by Dick Morris

    Who was it that defined neurosis as repeating the same mistake again and again, and expecting a better outcome each time? That???s really what the Clinton campaign is doing in its post-Chesapeake primary strategy. Now Hillary defines Obama as the candidate who makes speeches, while she is the one who provides ???answers??? and ???solutions.???

    Why is Hillary embracing this new line? It???s not that she has any great record of solutions or answers of which to boast, but rather that she wants to highlight Obama???s lack of a legislative record. Once again, she and her campaign geniuses are making the same mistake they made when they decided to use the experience as their defining difference with Obama. It???s not that she had much, but they sensed an opportunity to highlight that he had even less.
    Of course experience not only didn???t work. It backfired massively. By co-opting the experience tag, Hillary bought into the status quo and left Obama to be the agent of change. A candidacy that could have excited tens of millions of women, the first serious prospect of a female president, became merely a b