War the First Option
I didn't watch the Charlie Gibson interview with Sarah Palin but I've read and watched excerpts of it. This exchange caught my attention:
***
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.
***
Palin has the appearance of being a yellow-ribbon "Support the Troops" ditto head of Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush but on this one point she seems to be on a plank of her own. The way she framed her answer where she says we need to "get to the point... where war is not going to be the first option" would seem to imply that we aren't at that point now. We are not now at the point where war is not the first option. To phrase it without the double negative, we are currently at a point where war is a first option. We need to work toward changing this, but this is where it stands right now.
This stands in sharp contrast to what the Bush administration has been saying for the past six years. The Bush gang has been assuring us that war has to be the last option. Even Obama agrees on that point. But Palin says we aren't there now. Palin says we have to work with our allies and work on building new relationships before we can reach that point, that in fact as it now stands war is our first option.
I wonder if anyone else picked up on Palin's comment. Did she misspeak or is this how she actually frames the issue in her mind? And if this really is how she thinks about this, is she right? Is war the first option under Bush?
***
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.
***
Palin has the appearance of being a yellow-ribbon "Support the Troops" ditto head of Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush but on this one point she seems to be on a plank of her own. The way she framed her answer where she says we need to "get to the point... where war is not going to be the first option" would seem to imply that we aren't at that point now. We are not now at the point where war is not the first option. To phrase it without the double negative, we are currently at a point where war is a first option. We need to work toward changing this, but this is where it stands right now.
This stands in sharp contrast to what the Bush administration has been saying for the past six years. The Bush gang has been assuring us that war has to be the last option. Even Obama agrees on that point. But Palin says we aren't there now. Palin says we have to work with our allies and work on building new relationships before we can reach that point, that in fact as it now stands war is our first option.
I wonder if anyone else picked up on Palin's comment. Did she misspeak or is this how she actually frames the issue in her mind? And if this really is how she thinks about this, is she right? Is war the first option under Bush?
posted by Bill | 7:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home