Skip Nav
Photography
50 Couple Moments to Capture at Your Wedding
Sex
The 29 Steamiest Movie Sex Scenes of All Time
Disney
These 30 Disney Princess Tattoos Are the Fairest of Them All

Dem Guru: McCain 'Limited' by POW Years

Dem Guru: McCain 'Limited' by POW Years

Click to Read

Dem Guru: McCain 'Limited' by POW Years
Obama adviser Rand Beers says: “I think that the notion that the members of the Senate who were in the ground forces or who were ashore in Vietnam have a very different view of Vietnam and the cost that you described than John McCain does because he was in isolation essentially for many of those years and did not experience the turmoil here or the challenges that were involved for those of us who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam war. So I think, to some extent his national security experience in that regard is sadly limited and I think it is reflected in some of the ways that he thinks about how US forces might be committed to conflicts around the world."

0 Comments
Around The Web
9-Year-Old Syrian Refugee at State of the Union 2016
Obama's Speech on Gun Control Executive Action
Presidents' Pets
Aretha Franklin Performance Brings President Obama to Tears

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Yea I agree Steph. Essentially thats what it boils down to for both McCain and Obama as well as voters.
stephley stephley 7 years
Yeah we divide here. Obama never wanted the war - always thought it was ill-conceived - so the idea that he would come in and accept it as a given and move on with it wouldn't make sense to me. It would make sense to you as someone who believes that we can fix it.
stephley stephley 7 years
Yeah we divide here. Obama never wanted the war - always thought it was ill-conceived - so the idea that he would come in and accept it as a given and move on with it wouldn't make sense to me. It would make sense to you as someone who believes that we can fix it.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
But Steph, again you're playing into my point, McCain has never said he would push around his advisors until he got the answer he wanted, whereas Obama pretty much said that exactly when he was on Fox News Sunday - WALLACE: I want to ask you about presidents and listening to generals. Petraeus, I don’t have to tell you, is the architect of the troop surge, a strong advocate of our continued engagement in Iraq. If you become commander-in-chief and he says your plan to get out of Iraq is a mistake, will you replace him? OBAMA: I will listen to General Petraeus, given the experience that he has accumulated over the last several years. It would be stupid of me to ignore what he has to say. But it is my job as president, it would be my job as commander in chief to set the mission. To make the strategic decisions in light of the problems that we’re having in Afghanistan, in light of the problems that we are having in Pakistan, the fact that al Qaeda is strengthening as our National Intelligence Estimates have indicated since 2001. And so we’ve got a whole host of tasks and I’ve also got to worry about the fact that the military has no strategic reserve right now. If we had an emergency in the Korean Peninsula, if we had an emergency elsewhere in the world, we don’t have the troops right now to deal with it. And that’s not my opinion, that’s – WALLACE: So would you replace him or would you just say, I’m the commander-in-chief, here’s my order. OBAMA: What I would do is say — what I will do is say we have a new mission. It is my strategic assessment that we have to provide a timetable to the Iraqi government. I want you to tell me how best to execute this new assignment and I am happy to listen to the tactical considerations and any ideas you have. So to you, that might not sound like "I'll do what I want when it comes to this war" but to me, thats exactly what it sounds like.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I never said you were saying it's irrelevant, pop.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
lilkimbo, I am not saying it's entirely 100% irrelevant. All else being equal, serving in the military 30-40 years ago probably taught him some interesting things, a couple of which might be helpful in today's war. But I'm talking about significance here. And so while I say it's not irrelevant, I can also say that I don't believe it's reason enough to make a difference.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
lilkimbo, I am not saying it's entirely 100% irrelevant. All else being equal, serving in the military 30-40 years ago probably taught him some interesting things, a couple of which might be helpful in today's war.But I'm talking about significance here. And so while I say it's not irrelevant, I can also say that I don't believe it's reason enough to make a difference.
stephley stephley 7 years
I see your point, but a president who will listen to his military advisers and not move them around until he gets the answer he wants can do just as well. Also, who the president puts in charge at the Pentagon is significant.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Well then Steph you are just proving my point. We've had someone in charge of this war with very little military experience and its gone swimmingly right? So why not put someone else in charge of the war with even LESS military experience?
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Well then Steph you are just proving my point. We've had someone in charge of this war with very little military experience and its gone swimmingly right? So why not put someone else in charge of the war with even LESS military experience?
stephley stephley 7 years
Cab, what about all the vast years of experience that went into planning this Iraq war? Even you acknowledged that it was poorly handled.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Pop, lets say there are two people with an IQ of 90. One served in the war and one didn't. I would say the one who did is more qualified.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
So let's say some guy with an IQ of 90 is serving in the war as a soldier. You think he's automatically now more qualified to manage a war than someone who wasn't a soldier? By no means am I saying McCain has an IQ of 90. I'm simply saying that in and of itself, his experience doesn't automatically qualify him somehow. If he ws a 4-star general, sure. But he wasn't. I'm not disparaging him. I think his service was honorable and admirable. I just think it's a logical fallacy to assume that _any_ level of military service qualifies a person to manage a war better than someone who didn't serve. As for your assertions about Obama, that is neither here nor there for me in this particular argument, because you can't really say he'd have a different viewpoint if he'd served. BTW, I'm not saying that I think Obama is MORE qualified. I'm just saying that when comparing the two, I'm not going to use McCain's service as a line item in the "PRO" column, in terms of this current war. It will be in the "PRO" column for honor, character etc.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
So let's say some guy with an IQ of 90 is serving in the war as a soldier. You think he's automatically now more qualified to manage a war than someone who wasn't a soldier?By no means am I saying McCain has an IQ of 90. I'm simply saying that in and of itself, his experience doesn't automatically qualify him somehow. If he ws a 4-star general, sure. But he wasn't. I'm not disparaging him. I think his service was honorable and admirable.I just think it's a logical fallacy to assume that _any_ level of military service qualifies a person to manage a war better than someone who didn't serve.As for your assertions about Obama, that is neither here nor there for me in this particular argument, because you can't really say he'd have a different viewpoint if he'd served. BTW, I'm not saying that I think Obama is MORE qualified. I'm just saying that when comparing the two, I'm not going to use McCain's service as a line item in the "PRO" column, in terms of this current war. It will be in the "PRO" column for honor, character etc.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Sorry Pop but it doesn't make sense to me, how could anyone possibly argue that someone with military experience is no more qualified to manage a war than someone without it? It just doesn't make any sense. Quite honestly, when reading Obama's plans for withdrawal and such it is glaringly obvious how his lack of military experience affects those plans.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Sorry Pop but it doesn't make sense to me, how could anyone possibly argue that someone with military experience is no more qualified to manage a war than someone without it? It just doesn't make any sense. Quite honestly, when reading Obama's plans for withdrawal and such it is glaringly obvious how his lack of military experience affects those plans.
stephley stephley 7 years
Who has called military service a detriment? I've never heard that.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
I definitely don't see his experience as irrelevant, or a detriment. I just hear people saying things like "Well, with McCain's military experience he's clearly more qualified than Obama to lead the country in war..." All other arguments about the war and their abilities aside, I simply disagree with that notion. Hope that makes sense.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
I definitely don't see his experience as irrelevant, or a detriment. I just hear people saying things like "Well, with McCain's military experience he's clearly more qualified than Obama to lead the country in war..." All other arguments about the war and their abilities aside, I simply disagree with that notion. Hope that makes sense.
UnDave35 UnDave35 7 years
It seems to me that the only people who look as military service as a detriment are those who have never donned the uniform, taken the oath, and served their country.
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
I'd hope that not many people think of military service as a detriment, cabaker :) especially when we're fighting two wars--but I can understand differences in how much one thinks of service as an additional qualification for public office.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
What a commentary on society today...
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
Its a pretty sad moment in our nation's history when people look at military service as a DETRIMENT.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
No, working at an Abercrombie and Fitch store does not qualify you to be a fashion designer, but it is also not completely irrelevant.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
I'm sure if given the choice between being imprisoned and tortured, and going through the "turmoil" in the US, McCain would have chosen "turmoil." Obama and his camp really need to watch what they say or it's going to rightly piss a lot of people off.That said, being imprisoned in war doesn't qualify you to lead the armed forces. Neither does being a soldier. It's like saying that because you work in an Abercrombie and Fitch store you are qualfied as a fashion designer.
Latest Love
X