Would McCain Have Authorized The Strike That Killed A Senior Al Qaeda Commander Last Month?
Would McCain Have Authorized The Strike That Killed A Senior Al Qaeda Commander Last Month?
In Wisconsin last night, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) attacked Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), calling him “an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan.” The Arizona senator repeated the charge on Good Morning America earlier today, claiming that “Obama wants to bomb Pakistan without talking to the Pakistanis.”
McCain is distorting what Obama said in August about the use of force in Pakistan. Here are Obama’s actual words:
If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets, and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.
As Joe Klein notes, “Obama was merely saying that he supported current U.S. policy.” The Washington Post reported yesterday that in late January, the CIA killed “a senior al Qaeda commander” in Pakistan “without getting the government’s formal permission beforehand”:
Having requested the Pakistani government’s official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.
At a media availability today a reporter noted that what Obama’s “saying is not going after Pakistan, but going after al Qaeda targets within Pakistan.” “That’s still bombing Pakistan,” replied McCain. He then called Obama “naive.” Watch it:
So, to get McCain’s “straight talk” straight, he claims Obama is “naive” and “inexperienced” for doing what the CIA calls “a model” of how to score victories against al Qaeda. Does this mean that if he were President and the Pakistani government “turned down” requests for cooperation, McCain would have let a top al Qaeda commander go free?
UPDATE: Ilan Goldenberg, Michael Cohen and Matthew Yglesias all have more.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
72 Responses to “Would McCain Have Authorized The Strike That Killed A Senior Al Qaeda Commander Last Month?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Ha-ha, I was waiting for a thread like this….
My guess is Mc would certainly have authorized this. When I heard him
bagging on Obama’s Pakistan statement I thought it was a mis-step.
Obama would be smart to exploit this.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:25 pmi don’t think it needs exploiting - pretty well speaks for itself, and shows how far off-tempo mcmaverick has/will wander(ed)
February 20th, 2008 at 1:27 pmOl’ Warmonger needs to just shut the fluck up.
Good grief. He is very nearly as embarrassing as Chimpy. :o/
February 20th, 2008 at 1:29 pmHey, Keltoi - how d’you like the very best your party has to offer?
Yum, yum!
February 20th, 2008 at 1:29 pmHey, LAY OFF of Musharraff!!
He PROTECTS Osama for the Bush WAR CRIMINALS,
and gives Osama NUKES to play with!!
REAL ones, too, NOT the NONEXISTENT ONES that TRAITOR Bush used as an excuse to invade Iraq…
Those Bushes LOVE them some Osama!!!
February 20th, 2008 at 1:29 pmi don’t think it needs exploiting - pretty well speaks for itself, and shows how far off-tempo mcmaverick has/will wander(ed)
Comment by tombaker — February 20, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
They are already taking each others range; McCains comment is a perfect opportunity to draw the first substantive blood. I look to see O mention it often within the next two weeks before Texas/Ohio.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:30 pmJust more republican distortion and smearing. He’s got nothing but talk, and old man mutterings about how he’s against hope and progress. I can’t wait to see him on stage with Obama in a debate. his best hope is the syympathy vote.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:30 pmWhat the hell is happening to John McCrazy’s face? Too much botox? Maybe he’s botoxed his entire body since he looks like a walking stiff.
The fact that he’s already trying to lie about what Obama said signals a very desperate man. He will soon realize that the will of the american people will obliterate his message and render his voice useless.
Let’s all send him a case of Viagra so he continues the MO - the brainless needledick.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:30 pmDo you think he purposefully distorts stuff, kind of like with the Romney Iraq thing and this, or is really just feeble? Inquiring minds want to know.-
February 20th, 2008 at 1:31 pm*he*
February 20th, 2008 at 1:31 pmHey, Keltoi - how d’you like the very best your party has to offer?
Comment by Leftside Annie — February 20, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
My voting record: Bush I in 88, Perot in 92 and 96, Nader in 00, Libertarian in 04 (best third party vote available). So be nice about the MY party jazz, I have voted Repub once in 20 years.
Obama may have me voting Dem for the first time ever. Hillary isn’t quite dead, though.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:32 pmMcCain would be smart to avoid pointing at kettles. If he’s going to talk about Obama’s wanting to bomb somebody (even when he has to seriously distort Obama’s words to do so), how in the world does he figure his own warmongering record won’t come up?
And yes — I would like to see these two in a debate, too.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:33 pmAnd the ONLY thing you can tell that McCain’s focus will be on is MORE WAR, DEATH, and pandering to the Military Industrial Complex.
“You’re either WITH McCain and Bush OR
You’re with the USA and the TRUTH!â€
NRA Gun Nut(e)s
February 20th, 2008 at 1:34 pm#9 I’m not sure where the dimentia leaves off and the evil kicks in with McCain. I’d say it’s a health dose of each at this point. Time will produce the obvious cracks or breaks with reality of someone seriously suffering from a combo PTSD & senile dementia. No one is speaking about his invasive melanoma these days. It’s one horrendous form of cancer and actually turns your organs black before you realize what’s happening. Most docs don’t believe that McCain even has a 4 year life span left to fulfill his presidential obligations. I’m sure we’ll be hearing more about his advancing cancer soon.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:34 pmMy voting record: Bush I in 88, Perot in 92 and 96, Nader in 00, Libertarian in 04 (best third party vote available). So be nice about the MY party jazz, I have voted Repub once in 20 years.
Obama may have me voting Dem for the first time ever. Hillary isn’t quite dead, though.
Comment by Keltoi — February 20, 2008 @ 1:32 pm
You just brought up another discussion point not touched on — why aren’t there any visible third party candidates emerging this year? Or is it still too early for that?
February 20th, 2008 at 1:35 pmMcCain should be dubbed the Arbitor of Doom or the Death Shroud since he’s so obsessed with death and destruction.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:35 pmYikes, Keltoi - that voting record ain’t nuttin’ to be proud of - !
But hey, welcome to the light. ;o)
February 20th, 2008 at 1:36 pmMcCain: “Get off my lawn, Obama!!”
February 20th, 2008 at 1:36 pmComment by whatevah — February 20, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
I agree whateveh - I call him the Doom and Gloom candidate.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:38 pmmissmolly: Although Bloomberg has been making noises, I believe that he wants to remain significant to the political conversation by appearing interested. So far it’s worked quite handily. If the Repugs weren’t so concerned about the dwindling numbers of their party, I’d bet that they’d run someone as a third against McCain since they abhore him so.
My bet is that Obama is satisfying most Unaffiliateds/Independents at this point. I don’t believe that the same will apply if Hillary becomes the candidate. Then I believe that you will see someone coming forward to run against Hillary.
McCain is pretty irrelevant right now with his abysmal showing in Wisconsin - He only received some fifty percent of what today is 28% registered as Republican. 50% of his base is not newsworthy. Now 50% of the Dem base is saying something.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:39 pmTwo Thumbs Up, Mary. Doom & Gloom as in the schizoid persona of Mr. McCrazy. One side of his head is “Doom” and the other side is “Gloom”. That works well.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:40 pmre 18:
Then he shufles back into his house and says to the little woman “This neibhorhood has gone to hell since those people started moving in.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:40 pmYou just brought up another discussion point not touched on — why aren’t there any visible third party candidates emerging this year? Or is it still too early for that?
Comment by missmolly — February 20, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
It’s expensive for one thing, and third party candidates like Nader may have learned a painful lesson in 2000 and 2004 (I HOPE!), that they do more damage than good during certain elections.
Bloomberg seems to have faded into the woodwork, but I suppose that Hucklebee could be egomaniacal enough to attempt a third party offer, if only to force the Republicans to put him on the ticket.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:41 pmre 20: I wouldn’t be suprised to see hucklberry run. He’s gets the votes he’s looking for and he seemed pretty pissed last night that the establishment in DC is trying to force him out of the race. Plus, jesus told him to run.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:42 pmMy voting record: Bush I in 88, Perot in 92 and 96, Nader in 00, Libertarian in 04 (best third party vote available). So be nice about the MY party jazz, I have voted Repub once in 20 years.
Obama may have me voting Dem for the first time ever. Hillary isn’t quite dead, though.
Comment by Keltoi — February 20, 2008 @ 1:32 pm
Perot? Twice? Oh, jeeze, Keltoi I had credited you with way more sense than that. One of the loonier bastids ever to run for office, but thank god he did. You helped elect Clinton.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pmwhat gummitch said..(do your gumms really itch?)
February 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pmI’m so excited at the prospect of Obama kicking McCain’s ass. I know he’s going to do an awesome job at that.
For once, the American people have a choice for president besides stale bread.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pmYou just brought up another discussion point not touched on — why aren’t there any visible third party candidates emerging this year? Or is it still too early for that?
Comment by missmolly — February 20, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
I wish I could remember the source of this rumour, I can’t recall if it was on Air America or one of the right wing shows, but someone was floating the idea that if Hillary got the nomination by virtue of Superdelegates Mike Bloomberg had pledged to offer Obama a blank check and run as his VP in a third party bid.
That would be nutty beyond belief. Probably nothing to it, and Hill is going down fast, but man would it be awesome to see someone NOT a R or a D get the big chair.
And that, Annie at 17, was the whole point of my voting record - I don’t care for either of the big parties and consistently try to help whichever 3rd party candidate has the best shot. All that tied Nader and Perot together is their 3rd partiness.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:44 pmIn Keltoi’s defense, my dad voted for nixon twice, and will admit it now. At least keltoi claims to not have voted for bush twice…
February 20th, 2008 at 1:44 pmNader in 00, Libertarian in 04 (best third party vote available).
Comment by Keltoi
How could anyone vote for Nader and then turn around and vote Libertarian in the next election? Theie ideologies are diametrically opposed. Either you know nothing about Ralph Nader, or you know nothing about the Libertarian Party.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pmOn the other hand, this does seem to be the first policy on which McCain admits he disagrees with Bush since the primaries started. I guess he only takes issue with the (few) intelligent ones.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pmConservatives want to take no action benefiting the U.S., including its security. McCain is pandering to the red-meat-three-times-a-day conservatives, or “Keep Al-Qaeda alive so defense industries have neverending good quarterly results.”
February 20th, 2008 at 1:47 pmMy voting record: Bush I in 88, Perot in 92 and 96, Nader in 00, Libertarian in 04 (best third party vote available). So be nice about the MY party jazz, I have voted Repub once in 20 years.
Obama may have me voting Dem for the first time ever. Hillary isn’t quite dead, though.
Comment by Keltoi
So you voted democratic in 92 and republican all the rest of those years……this ain’t pakistan. As Leftside Annie said though….welcome to the light.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:47 pmIt is going to be very revealing when goes head to head in debate with Barak Obama
February 20th, 2008 at 1:49 pmI can’t wait till he has to debate Obama.
I guarantee he will have his Howard Dean moment.
I’m going to Bomb Iran then I’m going to destroy Syria then I’m going to
February 20th, 2008 at 1:49 pmtake a nap. WHOOOOO HOOOOOOOO
At least keltoi claims to not have voted for bush twice…
Comment by Bobwurst
Yeah, it seems that almost nobody voted for Bush. And, everyone voted Libertarian. Whatever happened to those 59,054,087 people who voted for Bush in 2004? Did they leave the country?
February 20th, 2008 at 1:49 pmSeems to me that we’ve killed hundreds of their Number 2 men, now a “Senior Al-Qaeda Commander,” I wonder what number he was? How come we never see any pictures, or have actual confirmation for someone besides the military, that we’re doing all this killing? Are we getting enough babg for our buck!
February 20th, 2008 at 1:50 pmAt least in Nam, you could pile the bodies up for the world to see!
I have “NEVER” believed a word of anything, that comes from the Bush Administration or any of their Sycophants!!
McCain and the GOP are on the wrong side of Bush’s Iraq failure. America doesn’t want or need any more war, death, or GOP debt. When McCain is debating Obama he can explain–for the whole world to see–why hitching his train to the failed Bush legacy makes sense. Maybe he can even explain how he thinks Republicans are the right ones to fix Bush’s Republican mess. Good luck with that.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:50 pmshoeless: 10 million people “didn’t buy” the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack, either. “Libertarian” is “Conservative” code for “I voted a straight GOP ticket, but want to distance myself from the Bush-Rove GOP mess.”
February 20th, 2008 at 1:53 pmI find it highly amusing that both Bush and McCain call Obama wrong when he says that we should be bombing Al Queda in Pakistan even without the “go ahead” from President Musharaff but then our CIA goes and does that exact attack. We got one of their guys and we should continue these kinds of strikes in the western mountainous regions of Pakistan. Here’s my post on the subject with video of Bush 2.0 harping on Obama’s tack…
Mr. Purple
February 20th, 2008 at 1:54 pmGlad TP did this thread, as I spoke of this on a previous thread.
McCain continues to mislead America today by saying Obama said he would bomb Pakistan. Obama had said he would go after high-value Al Queda targets there if the country’s president was unwilling to act. Their was a recent air strike on such a target. McCain failed to mention that. Comment by leftcoast — February 20, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
February 20th, 2008 at 1:58 pmMaybe there are more things about leading a nation McCain doesn’t understand besides just economics? -
February 20th, 2008 at 2:01 pmMcCain is such a tool. And a rusty one at that.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:05 pmI agree with Bush and Obama on this one….You see any Al Qaeda in Pakistan, you pull the trigger, regardless of what Musharaff or ISI have to say.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:13 pmYeah, it seems that almost nobody voted for Bush. And, everyone voted Libertarian. Whatever happened to those 59,054,087 people who voted for Bush in 2004? Did they leave the country?
Comment by shoeless — February 20, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
It is curious, shoeless, especially since Bush got almost 60 million votes, and Badnarik, the Libertarian nominee got fewer than 400,000 total. I guess most of those Libertarians frequent progressive blogs.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:14 pmyou pull the trigger, regardless
Comment by Exley
same solution you have for everything, right.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:15 pm$43 - “McCain is such a tool. And a rusty one at that.” Comment by Mr. Evil — February 20, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
It’s what happens when one is old, used, abused, and refuses to fight back.
If Sen. McCain had fought back against the Bush Slime Machine in 2000, maybe he’d deserve respect for his current attempt at the White House..
February 20th, 2008 at 2:15 pm.
What McCampaign meant to say was:
“Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb Iran… not Pakistan.”
.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:17 pmIf Sen. McCain had fought back against the Bush Slime Machine in 2000, maybe he’d deserve respect for his current attempt at the White House..
Comment by Democrat Soldier
he lost respect for lots of reasons…..like flipflopping on torture……I never liked him or Powell. I never understood why folks liked or respected either one of them……oh well.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:19 pm[exley attempts a cute manuever to put obama and bush in the same basket. too bad bush can’t actually be given credit for the events of 1/29]
February 20th, 2008 at 2:23 pm#50 - “I never liked him or Powell. I never understood why folks liked or respected either one of them……oh well.” Comment by Fred — February 20, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
It was the uniform that lulled people into giving respect before it was earned.
It’s a failing of the right, and some on the left, that simply putting ona uniform that you MUST have respect. Sorry, it don’t work that way. Respect is earned by your actions, no matter what you’re wearing.
I respect both Sen. McCain’s & Gen. Powell’s service, but they have lost all respect for their actions (flip-flopping, lies, spinelessness, whoring for the rich and powerful over the individual citizens).
Actions speak louder than words. It’s too bad, and very sad, that their actions make then un-respectable.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:23 pmIt was the uniform that lulled people into giving respect before it was earned.
Comment by Democrat Soldier
this goes way back….I’m a nam vet but since I’ve grown up I found out lots of things like the wwI bonus vets and how they were treated….and by who. Growing up we never would have thought that Patton and McArthur and Eisenhower would have been involved in things like that.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:27 pmMcCain = really old fish in a barrel
Campaign 2008 is going to be a hoot!
February 20th, 2008 at 2:28 pmIt is curious, shoeless, especially since Bush got almost 60 million votes, and Badnarik, the Libertarian nominee got fewer than 400,000 total.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama
Yeah, I seem to have met everyone of them.
Did you know that well over 1 million people attended the 1965 NFL Championship game in Green Bay?
February 20th, 2008 at 2:30 pmhe lost respect for lots of reasons…..like flipflopping on torture……
Fred — February 20, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
I can’t find anything McCain hasn’t flip-flopped on now, not just torture.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:33 pmcan anyone else?
I can’t find anything McCain hasn’t flip-flopped on now, not just torture.
can anyone else?
Comment by Wayne
no, and I would like to see a much more honorable veteran at the convention waving a flip flop with mcCains name on it……John Kerry
February 20th, 2008 at 2:37 pmThe repub party has been taken over by those who see America as a society ripe for the pickings.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:44 pmA free reign has been given to business via the degradation of agency oversight. We have had a president who derides the Constitution via signing statements of un-paralleled numbers and took us to a war without justification. Republicans would learn much from reviewing the Constitution. Had repubs looked at all then impeachment would be their call.
Their party is in need of an overhaul. McCain is not their answer and they know it, but they know they are stuck when no other leader would risk going into it now. Why did not another repub senator really get into this race? Because they know this is not the time. They know they must re-define their party before 2012 or see dems in office for the next two decades.
56 - Wayne - he’s never flip-flopped about wanting to be President.
Everything else, though…
February 20th, 2008 at 2:45 pmPerot? Twice? Oh, jeeze, Keltoi I had credited you with way more sense than that. One of the loonier bastids ever to run for office, but thank god he did. You helped elect Clinton.
Comment by gummitch — February 20, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
He had 40% at one point. Sure, he would have been a shot of heroin to the system, but the system needs to be remade completely. If you look at my votes, the ONLY thing that ties them together is they were the best 3rd Party shot that year.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:52 pmIf you look at my votes, the ONLY thing that ties them together is they were the best 3rd Party shot that year.
Comment by Keltoi
the only thing that tied them together is your complete misunderstanding of how politics work in America……You actually thought you were providing the seed for a viable 3rd party…..each time…..?
February 20th, 2008 at 2:56 pm…You actually thought you were providing the seed for a viable 3rd party…..each time…..?
Comment by Fred — February 20, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
Gotta start somewhere. Anything to break the two party stranglehold. Both the Dems and Repubs started as outside parties with charismatic leaders….if a 3rd Party guy was incumbent, it could be the start of something larger.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:04 pm#62 - “Gotta start somewhere. Anything to break the two party stranglehold. Both the Dems and Repubs started as outside parties with charismatic leaders….if a 3rd Party guy was incumbent, it could be the start of something larger.” Comment by Keltoi — February 20, 2008 @ 3:04 pm
I can see where you’re coming from. All existing parties started from somewhere outside the current system.
Something I think you’re ignoring is that, eventually, they become PART of the system. They become as jaded and corrupt as the CURRENT system. It always happens.
So, how’s the knowledge that the third-party votes are responsible for Pres. Bush getting selected in 2000?
February 20th, 2008 at 3:20 pmOMG. It just came to me. Bush has had himself cloned into a 71-year old senator from Arizona, and one with a bad temper.
It appears this clone also doesn’t have a clue about what the facts are, and thinks that if you repeatedly say something long enough, it becomes the truth!
God save us…
February 20th, 2008 at 3:37 pmSo, how’s the knowledge that the third-party votes are responsible for Pres. Bush getting selected in 2000?
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 20, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
I am okay with it, I did not want to see a 3rd Clinton term. Clinton himself got elected because of Perot, so it is poetic justice Nader defeated Gore.
And that is always the thing about voting 3rd Party - depending on how it breaks, the only effect is you hand the election to one of the big parties. I have never lived in a competitive state, so my vote is more geared to the overall reckoning of the percentages than getting someone elected.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:37 pmYou just brought up another discussion point not touched on — why aren’t there any visible third party candidates emerging this year? Or is it still too early for that?
Comment by missmolly
I think that anyone thinking of running who has leanings to the left won’t run because they don’t want to tip the scales to give us another Republican president, especially not McPander Bear. If there is a third party candidate I expect it will be someone who will run with the backing of the religious right. I think that the right knows that they are not going to win this one and the religious right may just want to assert their dominance by running a third party candidate. They may run Huckabee.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:40 pmI’m sure we’ll be hearing more about his advancing cancer soon.
Comment by whatevah — February 20, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
As well as him being one of the Keating 5 and Cindy’s drug addiction and subsequent theft of these drugs. I can’t wait.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:40 pmMcCain and his ilk deliberately spout unfounded distortions like this bombing Pakistan crap. They know it will be picked up as a soundbite and replayed endlessly on Fox News, usually with a scrolling update on the latest fear and hate.
The actual truth of these little pundit-feeding pellets is irrelevant. The point is for the politician to get their numb little supporters repeating the bullshit at work, parties, etc. That way when “moderate” folks, who may be pretty disinterested in politics and more concerned with anything from their medical bills to celeb-gossip, hear this crap they’re influenced by their peers.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:42 pmPersonally, I would love to see the party system abolished altogether. I would rather see us go to a simple popular vote. That is the only way we can insure a “one man one vote” system. It would also take the money influence out of the system.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:43 pmSo, how’s the knowledge that the third-party votes are responsible for Pres. Bush getting selected in 2000?
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 20, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
I am okay with it, I did not want to see a 3rd Clinton term. Clinton himself got elected because of Perot, so it is poetic justice Nader defeated Gore.
Comment by Keltoi
Loon Keltoi is fine with all the damage that Bush has done to this country. Nice! And Gore would not have been a third Clinton term in any way.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:45 pmMcCain = No Country for Old Men
February 20th, 2008 at 3:56 pmha!! - mccain says obama wants “to bomb pakistan without talking to the pakistais….”well mccain wants to bomb iran without talking to the iranians!!! - why dont the f**king media pin these guys down,and at least try and get a straight answer out of them - makes me f**king sick!!!
February 20th, 2008 at 8:19 pm#65 - “And that is always the thing about voting 3rd Party - depending on how it breaks, the only effect is you hand the election to one of the big parties. I have never lived in a competitive state, so my vote is more geared to the overall reckoning of the percentages than getting someone elected.” Comment by Keltoi — February 20, 2008 @ 3:37 pm
Well, I hope you enjoy having Pres. McCain at the helm in 2009.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:05 am