This week when Obama was here in Fayetteville, he promised that on his first day in office he would end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home and deploy more troops to Afghanistan.


>>>
>>>I have no doubts as to McCains's qualifications and drive to safeguard the defense of the nation. I can't say the same for Obama. Case closed for me, even though McCain was far down my list of favorites going into this.
>>>
>>
>>And there, in a nutshell, you have it all.
>
>Wow! Fear still has that tight of a grip on y'all?
>
>The Iraq war has only served to grow more people with anti-US sentiments around the world, some of whom will undoubtedly become terrorists.
>
>Your nation has not suffered any kind of terror event since 9/11 (the anthrax episode may prove otherwise, but who knows yet?) and the war in Iraq has literally nothing to do with that. Senator McCain's primary qualification is a military one. How does that help when it comes to preventing terror events at home?
>
>The war in Afghanistan rolls on. While it has wide support by many countries it remains under-manned and under-funded. The very country that housed Bin Laden and the country bordering the country where Bin Laden is most likely hiding. Senator McCain has said he WILL get Bin Laden. As far as I know the democratic candidates both take the same stand on that.
>And no remaining candidate in the primaries has said they intended to end that war.
>
>No nation (except possibly Afghanistan or Pakistan) is in danger of being conquered by Islamic Fundamentalists and being run by Taliban-like governments. There is no danger of Sharia Law being imposed in the U.S. So just what is this "safeguard the defense of the nation"? What is being prevented - terrorist attacks on U.S. soil? What are Senator McCain's credentials on that?... Are they any stronger than the democratic candidates'?
>
>Other countries have handled attacks on their own soil by means other than attacking other countries and they have citizens who are (collectively) far far less fearful than most Americans. They seem to understand that fighting terrorist attacks can be done very effectively by means other than brute military force somewhere else in the world.
>I know that the widespread sharing of intelligence amongst most countries has done much to help efforts to counter terrorist activities. But I suspect that only a paltry amount of such information, if any, comes from insurgents captured in Iraq (or Afghanistan). A successful terror event does not a conquest make.
>
>Some of your politicians are continuing to preach the nightmare scenario and they seem to continue to have a winning strategy. This truly is unbelievable to me.