the politics realm right now is 90% focusing on obama's overseas trip right now and mccain's logic and focus is still completely off on what obama is trying to say and i really don't think that anyone is explaining it correctly, not even the obama team.
mccain's stance is that obama should be like him and say that 'we can still win in iraq' and 'the surge has worked'. he uses these points to make it seem like obama was wrong in going against the surge and ultimately against trying to 'win' the war on terror in iraq. this logic is of course following the same pattern that the gop uses in moving focus from the real problems: 'we shouldn't have fucking been there in the first place' and 'the real war is in afganistan'.
yes, i do believe the surge helped and was good...yadda yadda. but why is iraq wanting us out so bad if there's so much percieved 'terror' still left in the area? the logic just doesn't make sense why we should be there anymore. the main terror cells and camps are in afganistan, and obviously move those people from there to iraq. what is there really to win in iraq and what do we have to actually acomplish to win there?
i don't really care that mccain is not giving a shit about going against the old rule that you don't attack a political opponent while they are overseas, but i just don't think that his attacks are really making any sense. though there's all these fucking news companies over there with obama and none of them explain in any depth the logic behind the baby's quarrels.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment