Would President John McCain…?

So would a president John McCain have captured Osama Bin Ladin? It’s a question that’s being raised on numerous Left-leaning blogs and discussion forums. And what’s causing people to pose the question is the following exchange that transpired in a July 2008, Larry King interview with then GOP presidential nominee, John McCain:

KING: If you were president and knew that bin Laden was in Pakistan, you know where, would you have U.S. forces go in after him?

MCCAIN: Larry, I’m not going to go there and here’s why, because Pakistan is a sovereign nation. I think the Pakistanis would want bin Laden out of their hair and out of their country and it’s causing great difficulties in Pakistan itself.

But I want to assure you I will get Osama bin Laden as president of the United States and I will bring him to justice no matter what it takes.

Hmmm… I’ll leave the interpretation of  McCain’s “I’m not going there” to your best judgment. Is McCain insisting that he would not send troops into Pakistan, as the country is a sovereign nation? Or is he merely using a colloquial expression “I’m not going to go there” to signal that it would be imprudent to announce such intentions publicly in the current venue, lest a diplomatic brou ha ha ensue? What we know of McCain’s character would tend to suggest the latter, but the fact that he goes on to insist that Pakistanis would naturally want to be rid of Bin Ladin without any external prodding would tend to validate the former interpretation.

In addition, it does seem that during the 2008 campaign there was a strategy by GOP hopefuls to paint Barack Obama as naive, in his determination to do what it takes to capture the Al Quaeda leader. Steve Benen, writing in the Washington Monthly notes a similar response from Mitt Romney:

Even Mitt Romney tried a similar tack during a nationally televised GOP debate:

“[Obama] went from going to sit down to tea with our enemies, but then he’s going to bomb our allies. I mean, he’s gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week.”

It’s a curious question, to be sure. And you can rest assured that if the shoe were on the other foot, the Right would be flouting this interview as clear evidence that Barack Obama did not have what it takes to bring the butcher of 9/11 to justice.


Yes, well, Obama was too vague.

ADD: To the point, it’s perfectly legit to say that Pakistan is a sovereign nation, blah-blah-blah. More than legit than, say, “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.”

I doubt “Preznit” Juan McCain would have been able to do anything as he would not have the resources ($) to do it.

Based on his grandstanding in Sept 2008 as the world financial casino was about to collapse, unlike Obama he have probably let it collapse sending the world into an economic depression potentially worse than the Great Depression although some would argue it is in one today.

@SanFranLefty: Now, if the NYT will just call “torture” what it is, we’re set.

@SanFranLefty: Bill must be Bill Keller — who’s Jill? Also, that’s ridiculous.

Paging RedManLaw: You were asking where was SoS Clinton? Per this photo, she was tracking it in real time with Black Eagle and Plugz.

@mellbell: Jill Abramson?

@SanFranLefty: Saw that photo earlier at TPM, and Rachel’s showing it right now. Look who just came back from Nerd Prom!

I was just reading Christopher Hitchens’ thoughts on the death of Bin Laden, and he mused, at one point, what was Bin Laden thinking. And it suddenly hit me, Bin Laden is another Charles Manson. Has anyone noted the similarities? There is one huge dissimilarity, Bin Laden was a child of privilege, the son of a billionaire, a millionaire, at the beginning, anyway. Bin Laden had some patina of “legitmacy,” he was a member of the higher orders of society, while Manson was from the dregs of the dregs, a destitute criminal orphan from birth. Bin Laden was able because of his status to create a much larger cult, a real organization. Manson just had a little commune of fellow drifters and destitutes.

But what Hitchens asked was, what did Bin Laden think he would accomplish, did he think he could lead an army against the west. And thats when it hit me, Bin Laden had the same plan as Manson.

Manson believed that there was a clash coming between antagonistic elements of our society. Helter Skelter, Manson believed that there was going to be a war between the whites and the blacks. Manson’s murders were his effort to ignite that war, he staged a false flag operation which he tried to blame on blacks, in the belief he could ignite racial war in the US. A terrorism operation he hoped would inflame the whites against the blacks and ignite a widespread racial war in the US, that would take down the established order. He planned to hide out, hunker down, in the desert, and then emerge to exploit the power vacuum.

Isn’t this, in its essence, comparable to Bin Laden’s plans? Bin Laden saw a looming conflict between Islam and the west. Bin Laden’s goal, his stated goal, was to ignite the conflagration, he didn’t intend to lead the armies against the west, like Manson, he planned to ignite armegeddon, let others fight, and then exploit the outcome.

They both had the same basic plan. One, the madness of a destitute criminal drifter who was the leader of a sad little hippie cult, observing the racial unrest of the 60s, and convinced it would lead to an armegeddo- like conflict that would destroy the current social order. And he embarked on a series of terroristic mass murders in an attempt to ignite that conflict. The other, the madness of a millionaire leader of a religious-warrior cult, observing the clash of islam and the west centered around Israel, and convinced he could ignite a final, armeggedon-like conflict between Islam and the West, while he hid out in the mountains as a spiritual leader, to emerge and exploit the new ground after the war.

Bin Laden = Charles Manson.

First round of revisionism sets in: Osama didn’t use wife as shield.

@SanFranLefty: Also, NYT literally stopped the presses last night. Unknown whether Honey got anybody Rewrite.

It seems that the right claims credit for Bush while the left wrings its hands over popular enthusiasm and cheering.

@ManchuCandidate: correct. let’s not forget that if the teapublican’ts had their way a few weeks ago, those wasteful government employed navy seals would have been on an unpaid furlough this weekend kicking back on the beach in san diego instead of double tapping bin laden in his left eye.

even though mccain would have refused to send the seals to pakistan, he was at least there in spirit. the seals obviously paid tribute to americas one and only reverse ace by purposely crashing a helicopter during the mission.

btw, my screen name was developed during mccains textbook campaign of 2008. since mccain was just like w, i called him john mcsame or stole it from some one else. to further liken him to w, i put a w in the middle, john w mcsame. then i shortened it to jwmcsame. get it? jwmcsame was a favorite of some and enemy to many more here in the local newspaper website knoxnews.com until i got permanently banned for calling rush limbaugh lush rimjob over, over, and over again.

@SanFranLefty: hillary looks like she just saw some body taking an ass whuppin’ seal style. sort of an “oh my” moment from dick enberg.

@Promnight: good analogy. too bad we couldn’t have bin laden locked up in corcoran and punked out by the A.B. like manson. any one heard how the swastika got on his forehead?

@jwmcsame: If they want to do something about the federal deficit, the Obama Administration could sell for $29.99 the DVD version of whatever live video footage that group was watching in the Situation Room.

Seems there may be a real answer to this although so much has changed since 2008:

Quitty-Quitter has made her millions, and now wears new glasses that won’t allow her to look backwards; McCain needs Any kind of win to share with his Sunday morning breakfast club friends; and that heavy hitter -w- decided he doesn’t do politics anymore.
(in other words, none of them have time for facts, new or old)

@SanFranLefty: I’ll buy it right now. it’ll be just like a football game. i can yell git ‘eem!!, git ‘eem!! over, over, and over again real loud. drunk.

@SanFranLefty: Anybody else notice how positively giddy Gates looks in that shot? Meanwhile, it is completely appropriate that the uniformed officer is operating the laptop, since those guys don’t do anything without PowerPoint.

@SanFranLefty: Just noticed that the picture in front of Hillary has been pixelated.

@mellbell: It was mentioned that they blurred some secret info. But I couldn’t find it.

@Nabisco: Yeah, I’d rather see the high-five photo with cigars and Cristal.

Add a Comment
Please log in to post a comment