Yes, that's right Kossacks. In today's foreign policy speech given in New York, John Edwards said the following:
As President I will condition future American aid on progress by Pakistan, including strengthening the reach of police forces, and working more effectively with tribal leaders and their members to ensure their acceptance of the government. But I want to be clear about one thing: if we have actionable intelligence about imminent terrorist activity, and the Pakistan government refuses to act, we will.
I recall when a certain other presidential candidate made some similar assertions...take a trip with me down memory lane:
Here's Barack Obama in August:
I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.
Those ostensibly honest observers around the blogosphere unloaded on Obama. Here's Jerome Armstrong's take (fair, as usual when it comes to Jerome):
...this is basically a continuation of the Bush-Cheney doctrine of endorsing unilateral pre-emptive military attacks abroad...
Here at DailyKos? The following diaries:
"Irresponsible Warmongering"
"Obama Has Lost Me" (because of his statement on Pakistan)
"Obama, It's Over (because of his statement on Pakistan)
"If I had to vote today, I'd vote for John Edwards" (in no small part because of Obama's statement on Pakistan)
and of course, there is much, much more.
My question is this: will Jerome Armstrong and all the others who absolutely freaked out because Obama said he would take out Al Qaeda in Pakistan now go equally nuts on John Edwards?
Somehow I doubt that.
For the record, I agree with both Obama and Edwards on this subject...
UPDATE: Wow, do many of you miss the point. In no way is this diary an attack on John Edwards. I agree with him 100% on this point.
This diary is highlighting those who went nuts savaging Obama for saying the exact same thing. It's about the hypocrisy of some around the blogosphere, NOT about John Edwards.