August 21, 2008
The Polish Question
There's good news and there's bad news.
The good news is Obama is suffering in the polls. Some polls even have him behind. Current electoral college focused polls show Obama losing the election.
The bad news is John McCain's is surging in the polls. Some polls even have him ahead. Current electoral college focused polls show McCain winning the election.
I have been asked before who I support in this election. One astute blog reader called me out on a comment left somewhere long ago in which I said the only way McCain would get my vote is as a vote against Hillary.
The truth is, there is no one currently running that I actually want to have in the White House. The truth is I have felt this way in every election except the first one in which I was eligible to vote and cast my vote for Reagan's second term.
I can't seriously consider casting a vote for Bob Barr because that would be a futile empty gesture. To meaningless an Quixotic even for me. For better or worse, either Obama or McCain will be the next President. The trick is to find the lesser two evils by examining the differences between the two candidates.
One issue where the differences are stark is national security. This was highlighted with the recent Russian invasion of Georgia and the response of the two candidates.
Obama, as he stumbled and fumbled through a series of differing responses until he found one that sounded good, was wishy-washy, internationalist and equivocating.
McCain's response was strong, unwavering and unequivical in placing the onus for the invasion squarely where it belonged, in Russia. As much as it pains me to say, I liked McCain's response. It was far superior to Bush response in the early days of the crisis. Bush started out sounding more like Obama but eventually came around to sounding more like McCain.
Recently the two candidates sat down for interviews with the pastor of some mega-church. He asked them each the same tough but fair questions. There has been endless analysis about who won, did McCain cheat etc. There is one question that wasn't asked that I wish had been.
The Polish Question.
At the height of the tension over Russia's invasion of Georgia, the United States and Poland signed an agreement for the U.S. to install a missile defense system in Poland. The Russians were not amused.
Vladimir Putin, speaking through the little wooden dummy in the Kremlin called Medvedev (seriously you couldn't see his lips move), said that if the system were actually installed, the Russian response would be beyond diplomacy.
This is not a problem that the Bush administration is going to solve. When it comes time to step up to Russia's line in the sand and decide what to do, Bush will be kicking back in Crawford. He's not likely to be out making crazy Clinton money on the lecture circuit.
This is a question that the next president will have to answer and one I would like to hear both candidates positions on before the election.
McCain's web site includes the following statement on missile defense:
The Obama web site gives the following position on the subject of missile defense:
I tend to think that showing any sign of weakness in the face of Russian aggression is a dangerous policy. I think that walking away from this agreement - for any reason - will be seen by the Russians as a victory over the U.S. and will out us and our allies in greater danger.
But there is this nagging question in the back of my mind. Another Polish question. What would Putin actually do?
The good news is Obama is suffering in the polls. Some polls even have him behind. Current electoral college focused polls show Obama losing the election.
The bad news is John McCain's is surging in the polls. Some polls even have him ahead. Current electoral college focused polls show McCain winning the election.
I have been asked before who I support in this election. One astute blog reader called me out on a comment left somewhere long ago in which I said the only way McCain would get my vote is as a vote against Hillary.
The truth is, there is no one currently running that I actually want to have in the White House. The truth is I have felt this way in every election except the first one in which I was eligible to vote and cast my vote for Reagan's second term.
I can't seriously consider casting a vote for Bob Barr because that would be a futile empty gesture. To meaningless an Quixotic even for me. For better or worse, either Obama or McCain will be the next President. The trick is to find the lesser two evils by examining the differences between the two candidates.
One issue where the differences are stark is national security. This was highlighted with the recent Russian invasion of Georgia and the response of the two candidates.
Obama, as he stumbled and fumbled through a series of differing responses until he found one that sounded good, was wishy-washy, internationalist and equivocating.
McCain's response was strong, unwavering and unequivical in placing the onus for the invasion squarely where it belonged, in Russia. As much as it pains me to say, I liked McCain's response. It was far superior to Bush response in the early days of the crisis. Bush started out sounding more like Obama but eventually came around to sounding more like McCain.
Recently the two candidates sat down for interviews with the pastor of some mega-church. He asked them each the same tough but fair questions. There has been endless analysis about who won, did McCain cheat etc. There is one question that wasn't asked that I wish had been.
The Polish Question.
At the height of the tension over Russia's invasion of Georgia, the United States and Poland signed an agreement for the U.S. to install a missile defense system in Poland. The Russians were not amused.
Vladimir Putin, speaking through the little wooden dummy in the Kremlin called Medvedev (seriously you couldn't see his lips move), said that if the system were actually installed, the Russian response would be beyond diplomacy.
This is not a problem that the Bush administration is going to solve. When it comes time to step up to Russia's line in the sand and decide what to do, Bush will be kicking back in Crawford. He's not likely to be out making crazy Clinton money on the lecture circuit.
This is a question that the next president will have to answer and one I would like to hear both candidates positions on before the election.
McCain's web site includes the following statement on missile defense:
Effective Missile Defense
John McCain strongly supports the development and deployment of theater and national missile defenses. Effective missile defenses are critical to protect America from rogue regimes like North Korea that possess the capability to target America with intercontinental ballistic missiles, from outlaw states like Iran that threaten American forces and American allies with ballistic missiles, and to hedge against potential threats from possible strategic competitors like Russia and China. Effective missile defenses are also necessary to allow American military forces to operate overseas without being deterred by the threat of missile attack from a regional adversary.
John McCain is committed to deploying effective missile defenses to reduce the possibility of strategic blackmail by rogue regimes and to secure our homeland from the very real prospect of missile attack by present or future adversaries. America should never again have to live in the shadow of missile and nuclear attack. As President, John McCain will not trust in the "balance of terror" to protect America, but will work to deploy effective missile defenses to safeguard our people and our homeland.
McCain's statement could be read as indicating that McCain would proceed with installing missile defense in Poland despite and in defiance of Russian threats This would seem to confirm that assumption:John McCain strongly supports the development and deployment of theater and national missile defenses. Effective missile defenses are critical to protect America from rogue regimes like North Korea that possess the capability to target America with intercontinental ballistic missiles, from outlaw states like Iran that threaten American forces and American allies with ballistic missiles, and to hedge against potential threats from possible strategic competitors like Russia and China. Effective missile defenses are also necessary to allow American military forces to operate overseas without being deterred by the threat of missile attack from a regional adversary.
John McCain is committed to deploying effective missile defenses to reduce the possibility of strategic blackmail by rogue regimes and to secure our homeland from the very real prospect of missile attack by present or future adversaries. America should never again have to live in the shadow of missile and nuclear attack. As President, John McCain will not trust in the "balance of terror" to protect America, but will work to deploy effective missile defenses to safeguard our people and our homeland.
Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said Tuesday that Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain would carry out the Bush administration's missile defense plans in Poland if he were elected.
The Obama web site gives the following position on the subject of missile defense:
National Missile Defense: An Obama administration will support missile defense, but ensure that it is developed in a way that is pragmatic and cost-effective; and, most importantly, does not divert resources from other national security priorities until we are positive the technology will protect the American public.
Translated this means that missile defense will be treated as afterthought if it is allowed to exist at all. Reading this one might be inclined to think that Obama would not support installing a missile defense system in Poland. And one would be right.Mr. Sikorski's attempt to determine what Mr. McCain's and Mr. Obama's plans for the shield might be is understandable given the significant commitment Poland would be making, Mr. Spring said.
Mr. McCain supports the program, but Mr. Obama does not.
"I will cut investments in unproven missile-defense systems. I will not weaponize space," Mr. Obama said last year.
Obama bases his position on his belief that missile defense doesn't work. But if missile defense doesn't work what are the Russians so upset about? Russia's power and influence in the region are based on two sources; energy and intimidation. Missile defense makes intimidation a little harder.Mr. McCain supports the program, but Mr. Obama does not.
"I will cut investments in unproven missile-defense systems. I will not weaponize space," Mr. Obama said last year.
I tend to think that showing any sign of weakness in the face of Russian aggression is a dangerous policy. I think that walking away from this agreement - for any reason - will be seen by the Russians as a victory over the U.S. and will out us and our allies in greater danger.
But there is this nagging question in the back of my mind. Another Polish question. What would Putin actually do?
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at 09:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
27kb generated in 0.0336 seconds; 38 queries returned 176 records.
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.
