CNN

Obama is not naive. He doesn't have enought experience to be naive. Inexperienced yes, stupid, yes. How in the hell do you think we could possible attack in a soverign country with nukes that the Moslims are dying to get hold of. That's all we need is a Moslim country with nukes and right next to India with nukes. India would use nukes in a second against a muslim terrorist country armed with nukes. As far as good intelligence – the whole argument as to why we shouldn't have gone to Iraq is because faulty intelligence. Our intelligence and our security etc isn't any better that it was before we went to Iraq and I surely wouldn't want to trust it as a reason to go into a country that could end up a terrorist nuclear capable country. There'd have to be pictures and fingerprints (absolute proof). First let's close the borders and rid this country of the terrorists that have entered in the last six years.
I hear Obama answering questions because he doesn't want to appear inexperienced but too many times what I heard was naive or downright wrong because he is completely inexperienced but then so is Hillary. Remember Bill's not with her. But Hillary you are inexperienced .... no I'm not I have Bill!

Its time for unity... somehow if the egos could be put aside it would be nice to see Hilary work with Obama instead of against... They would make a great team as president & vice president...

Obama is ABSOLUTELY no native!

You will change your own perspective if you work at your local police station, FBI, or White House.

What police officers know and you don't know. What FBI agents know and you don't know. What Senators and US President know and you don't know.

HOW DARE ARE YOU by calling them a NATIVE?!?!?! FIRST you work as a [position here] and tell us what do you think of Obama's statement! You may have a vital point on favor or oppose Obama's statement.

For me, I favor Obama.
Hey Obama, GO FOR IT!!

I have seen many comments on this blog which critisize Barack's suggestions of an "attack" on Pakistan. I have only one thing to say to these critics. DO YOUR HOMEWORK. When I read that same one line about sending our troops to Afganistan – I had the same reaction. "What is this man saying now?"
Please take the time to go back and read the whole speech which includes a five point plan to address terrorism. Then look at Obama's past actions, what he has said in speeches, how he has investigated problems. This is a well seasoned man who, I beleive will not draw us into a new war unnecessarily.
He is different than Bush. Bush said that he would use the military option only after all other alternatives had been explored. That did not happen.
Obama's actions have shown that he is completely capable of making well thought out decisions. Please go back and read the entire speech. It would be an unwise to judge his five point plan on one statement.

Its US failure to capture Osama and putting blame on Pakistan is not called for. Pakistan has paid a very heavy price on being the front line ally on the war on terror. Paksitan doesn't need to provide safe heaven to Osama, its the US who will be in trouble if Osama is captured and is put in front of world press and judicial courts. Many secrets will be revealed that will shake high-ups in the CIA and past / present US governments as we all know Osama is US's ex-love.

It is only natural that the US would attack Pakistan. They have attacked Iraq, to whom they supplied weapons to fight Iran. They have attacked Afghanistan, to whom they supplied weapons to fight the Soviet Union. This would be attacking Pakistan, to whom they supplied weapons to fight India. Looks like the US doesn't have a clue as to which side they should take, when it comes to the Middle-East and S.Asia..

Eustace you need to remove your head from the sand and wake up. We already have hit targets in Pakistan when we had actionable intelligence on the location of high ranking Al-Qaida members.

Also anyone who thinks that pulling out of Iraq will do more harm then good obviously has already forgotten about the wholesale slaughter of the South Vietnamese people after we left. Of course the South Vietnamese were promised that we would come back and bomb the North if the ceasefire was broken but as usual we showed how dependable the US really is in the long run.

We failed the Cuba rebels, we failed the South Vietnamese, we failed the Kurds, we failed the Shiites in Souther Iraq, and those are just the best examples of our failure to back up words with action. And people wonder why nobody trusts us to do what we say we will. But I guess you wouldn't mind the death toll from our failures to continue piling up

PEOPLE... READ THE SPEECH... OBAMA DID NOT ADVOCATE INVADING PAKISTAN IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM.

STOP TAKING LESSONS FROM THE MEDIA AND THINK FOR YOURSELVES.. ALL WHO SAID THEY ARE NOT SUPPORTING OBAMA ANYMORE... PLEASE READ THE SPEECH IN ITS ENTIRETY. HE DID NOT SAY LETS INVADE PAKISTAN...IF YOU ARE A TRUE SUPPORTER...GIVE THE MAN A CHANCE BY READING WHAT HE SAID NOT WHAT THE NEWS TOLD YOU. BE MORE RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS PLEASE. AMERICAN'S FUTURE CALLS FOR YOU TO READ CAREFULLY

So, the solution is to keep invading countries – leave one and invade another. How interesting!!! I feel sorry for the American Soldiers, very sorry.

Wow

So many comments, so much confusion, so much lack of comprehension.

I guess the media got the response it wanted...it was their intention to spin the man's best intentions to their own agenda which involves favoring Clinton and the Washington establishment.

The speech that Obama gave was a very comprehensive plan that underscores the strategies that must be employed to successfully win the so called war on terror.

Eveyone who hasn't read the speech seems to follow the Tabloid like coverage of this story. Read BBC and you see the difference between journalism and American tabloid coverage.

Obama did not suggest invading Pakistan. One sentence says that if we had actionable intelligence, we would TARGET those who killed Americans. As a student of international politics, how does that provoke a war with Pakistan or damage Musharraf. Those regions are almost within Afghanistan that they remain unpatrolled by Pakistan. Taqrgetting those people by no means jeopardize Pakistani's president or Pakistan. I do recall Obama in that same speech alluding to giving Pakistan as much support that he can but if they fail to act. Then America would act. There was nothing about sending troops into Pakistan in that speech.

You people need to wake up and get serious about your research, comprehension and analytical skills...failure to do so would do you all a great disservice.

This speech underscores vital political and military strategies...no one is advocating war with Pakistan...That was the furthest thing from Obama's mind. Increased pressure, certainly....targetting those regions if Bin Laden surfaces... of course. I guess Americans would feel much comfortable if Bin Laden slep peacefully at night.

Stop thinking with your asses and start thinking with your objective minds if that is even possible, especially since you get your information from the bias American tabloids who pose as legitimate news agencies.

Pakistan already has close to 90,000 troops in the tribal areas since 2001. Many of these brave soldiers have died fighting al-qaeda such that Pakistan has the second highest number of casualties in the war on terror.

The tribal areas of Pakistan, some of the most rugged terrain in the world is home to several million people. The last time any army ever went into that part of the world was in the early 1900s when the British sent twenty thousand troops to quell a rebellion. Only one british soldier returned alive. Pakistan, for the first time in its history has stationed 90,000 troops in its tribal areas.

Sending american troops into Pakistan will achieve nothing but alienate the majority of moderate Pakistanis with the most likely consequence that Pakistan will withdraw its voluntary support for the US. How is that policy smart? Obama will get the US out of Iraq and land it into a much bigger mess in Pakistan.

Obama talked about witholding F-16s. Well, the f-16s had been witheld throughout the 90s with the effect that Pakistan collaborated with China and now both Pakistan and China make their own fighter planes.

Why hasn't Pakistan captured Bin Laden? Well, surely you can tell that the Pakistan army is no where near the US army in terms of budget and strength. Then why hasn't the US army been able to defeat al-qaeda in iraq? Is Obama willing to put 90,000 american troops into Pakistan to police the tribal areas? To Pakistans credit, it has captured more al-qaeda members than any other country in the world.

Pakistan gets very little assistance from the US. Sanctions will do nothing but spew anger and hatred against the US. Afghanistan has done better than Iraq primarily because of Pakistan. Please do not let Obama destroy that.

Excuse me, but the country you are talking about ie pakistan is the home to absolutely normal "alive" human beings, not some anthole or insect home that can be attacked anytime. Who is Mr. Obama, by the way, or every one else here in support of him, to decide the fate of millions of people desiring a peaceful life? and who gives you the authority to attack any land whenever you desire?
America is not the only nation under attack from terrorists. Rather i should add that presently Pakistan herself is the nation most badly suffering from acts of terrorism. And above that, our all efforts and sufferings are being creamed on top by the thankless people like Obama. How frequently does America come under a terrorist attack? Try coming to Pakistan and measure the frequency. And all this has been fueled by America herself. And if the "great" leaders like Obama keep giving statements like these, it will only add up to the magnitude of the threat our world is facing today.

And this is why I am not voting for Mr. Obama.

Barack Obama is so far out in left field, I cannot even understand how he will find is out of the game. Let alone; to accomplish all that he says he will in 5,840 days.

Joe Biden really hit the nail smack dab square on the head this go around and sunk it completely in only one very swift and light blow. I did read Barack Obama’s counterterrorism speech in its entirety, and honestly, I do not know were this guy is coming from? He speaks very loosely and doses say a lot; what kind of dialog dose he expects to receive, and how is he too seek out in obtaining all the funding for his five step plan? Wow!!! Did he write the entire speech all by him self? Listening to him speak, seem as he should take up acting or reserve a little more time in rehearsing his lines. Not saying Joe Biden is the best choice; But dose American want President Bill Jefferson Clinton as our first gentleman? So I believe our choices are clear and are slim too none at these junctures in the path; with respect too our democratically nominated candidates.

How dose an inexperienced senator; such as the likes as Obama; get some idiotic notion or impression that he will be elected for the highest office in our land? I do not know exactly how many times he wrote in his speech (when I am President and/or as President will do this); at least over a dozen times, and only with his ridiculous five (5) step plan. He is promising to save the world like he some kind of god or something; what is in his mind? Dose he think he is some damn dead pharaoh that has come back from the after life!

Well he had better get started right away, or his plan is already domed for failure weather he is elected too the Presidential office or not. Dose Barack Obama’s even process the true qualities and capabilities for even the thought of handling the most powerful office in our Nation? Or dose he believe American citizens are the most ignorant people on our plant? But then again maybe some/most are just increasingly; inherently stupid and dose not pay any attention to their own livelihood and wellbeing!

Because he will need a lot more than just one hundred (100) days from the start, just to fulfill his 5th step plan that needs to be implemented priority one, and cover all his bases in doing so. Obama is nothing but a fish bowl of democratically placed double talk rhetoric all over again. If he plans on double talking our Nation while asleep at the wheel; he had better start his plans right here in our home land first. I do believe the American masses are intelligent enough too recognize the difference between the sand and water by now, even if they may be increasingly; inherently stupid.

I have reached the point of no return when it comes to making a decision for 2008 Presidential candidacy involving Barack Obama to sit in a disgraced throne occupied by previous administrations in the oval office of our White House; that he cannot possibly be filled with some sense of morality and integrity. When I will no longer give a second though or even consider his candidacy and I suspect it is mostly because of his display of his own in-experience rather than his actual potential. In any case he would benefit from being his own man once again to follow through his law practice and stop pretending to act with resistance to fatigue. Rather than pandering to what his staff perceive as the best answers for his own audience and sounds like his words may be dictated by others. We already have someone on board liken to him sitting their now.

P.S. Just for the record; personal opinions expressed in this comment are those of the writer are constitutional rights.

well i just have to say that why are people trying to blame pakistan when in real everybody knows that musharaf if the only president from pakistan who has helped the US so far in terrorism....if you go to pakistan and see how much changes have been made and so many anti-terrorist missions have happened, Musharaf is doing a great job on helping out to clear terrorism and keeping US out of Pakistan....bcoz everybody also knows that Bush wants to do the same thing to pakistan that he has done to Iraq(destroying it)...but then Musharaf is a very smart and a good president, yes hes made some mistakes but he has done alot of good things............THANK YOU!

several thousand pakistani soldiers have died since 9/11 policing the tribal areas such that pakistan has the second highest number of casualties in the war on terror.

Is Obama proposong that we alienate the government of Pakistan such that it withdraws 100,000 troops from its tribal areas? Is obama then willing to put that number of american troops and possibly much more in a nuclear state?

Iraq: 26 million people, no airforce or nukes, does not grow its own food, weakened by years of sanctions

Pakistan: 165 million people, has 100 nukes and missiles to deliver them, 4rth largest army in the world, has an airforce with f16s, grows most of its own food, GNP is 450 billion US$ (US aid in comparison is a mere few hundred million $).....

so let me get it straight – obama wants us to get out of iraq and attack/ alienate Pakistan instead? Is that smart?

To: Kelly in Providence, RI-
You say you are Obama fan, so explain this to me: Why on earth have you not taken the time to read his speech in its entirety? Don't you value the truth? Don't you prefer to read what Obama actually said as opposed to running with a misleading headline from CNN??
As a fellow Obama supporter, I'm very dissappointed in YOU.

I'm still waiting for the Obama bashers to begin attacking Hillary Clinton for agreeing with Obama. She said the same thing Obama said, so c'mon people...let's have some equal bashing time for Hillary
Well....anyone?

Obama's ideas for Iraq and Pakistan make Bush look like a genius.

Stop drinking that "Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson Everyone is Racist Kool-Aid" and think for yourself. It isn't the white people infatuated on whether or not Obama is "black enough". When people don't like Rice, Powell or a conservative black person it is A'Ok. When it is a liberal black person getting criticized for anything under the sun it is racism.

Anyhow get a clue, racism still exists. Racism is also not confined to any one race. As long as there are people out their screaming racisim everytime something happens it will always be a problem

It appears you people are trying to find any reason to not vote for Obama a Black man. Keep it up...Hillary will not see the inside of the White House without the Black vote. Remember that!!

In a Wednesday interview with American Urban Radio News Networks, Hillary Clinton adopted a similar position to Obama's on unilateral attacks within Pakistan's borders.

"We have to have a much smarter relationship with Pakistan and the military of Pakistan to build credibility and support for their taking the actions that only they can take within their own country. But clearly we have to be prepared.... if we had actionable intelligence that Osama bin Laden or other high-value targets were in Pakistan I would ensure that they were targeted and killed or captured."

Ok people...please start bashing Hillary too...I guess she's "naive" as well.

We should do exactly that. Make a secret troop build-up to launch a major offensive. Don't disclose it to anyone.

Pakistan is not in a political position to seriously hunt down the terrorists, without risking a revolt similar to what happened in Iran 1979.

We need to just seize the iniative and deal with the consequences later. Pakistani's will protest but they won't be able to blame their government.

I question the Bush Administration's commitment to winning the war when we let the enemy regroup and thrive in so called "ally" territory.

I am disappointed; I was an Obama fan. It is exactly this sort of “go get ‘em” rhetoric that resulted in the quagmire that is Iraq and it reflects a complete dismissal of the complexity and nuance of global politics. Pakistan is one of the most populous countries in the world, nuclear armed, and borders Iran, Afghanistan, China, India and Iran. It has been ruled by dictatorship for more than half its history (since 1947) and every elected government has been prematurely sacked. The current political situation and the “Islamicization” process is far more complex and vulnerable than Obama seems to think it is. Any military intervention in the country would surpass the nightmare in Iraq. Even the most elementary analysis would make clear the myriad reasons why it would be detrimental to attack Pakistan. It reflects Obama’s poor judgment, his ineptitude at foreign policy and is indicative of the same sort of shallow, cowboy bullying that has cultivated the state of panic that exists today.

Can I pose one question to all who have reacted to the Headlines? How many of you have actually read the speech in its entirety?

I've read that speech in its entirety atleast three times...that Pakistani posture is a last resort. This comes after he outlines increasing aid, educational support and arming the Pakistani government with all it needs to take out terrorists. He says if Pakistan fails to act then we will. In that sentence alone he promises to give the Pakistani government a chance. In that speech he said nothing about invading, he said if there were actionable intelligence he would TARGET THOSE TERRORISTS. Is that something so wrong. To me that is hardly invading and so much more practising fundamental military common sense strategy. I guess we should ignore the threats and see what happens again. That seems to be the attitude all you nay sayers have.

The many other postures he outlines in this comprehensive FIVE POINT plan unfolds in a way that does not have to lead to targetting those terrorists in Pakistan (ONE POINT)if the other measures are followed. If often bothers me that we are able to react based on headlines which are spun enermously by the msm to carry out their own agenda.

Barack Obama carefully yet forcefully proposed a sophisticated and feasible plan. When one committs to attending an international islamic forum to redefine the American struggle against extremism. That is highly indicative of a man who gets the severity and complexities of this war on terror. While taking into account the military matters, he consistently noted the battle of ideas and perception. He called for setting up America Houses, Development Teams to work to create immediate impact on peoples lives while in conflict ridden areas. All of these key points have been forgotten. Instead we focus on what the media tells us to focus on.

READ PEOPLE READ AND NOT BE TAUGHT BY THE MEDIA AND SPIN MASTERS. That speech was a very common sense, multilateralist, internationalist speech. It was a perfect balance between common sense and common troubles.

Well...watched a report on CNN just a few minutes ago about Obama's speech, and the reporter was Candi Crowley. In this report, CNN showed Hillary Clinton saying "...if we have actionable intelligence about high-value targets in Pakistan like Bin Laden and his deputies, I would strike to have them killed or captured."
This comment was made by Hillary earlier this year...where was the outrage? All you clowns attacking Obama...where were you when Hillary said the exact same thing?

Sheesh.

And you know what else is funny, not one presidential hopefull has disputed anything Obama has said. There looking for a way to counter his terrorist plan but they cant because it is straight to the point strong and something we may have to consider. We are more worried about an ally who is not making an effort to get Bin laden but yet we should just continue to let that ride? We still owe the 3,000 Americans that!

Everyone posting against Obama's speech is full of crap! If you read the speech you would see he he's not advocating war he’s' trying to protect Americans! He putting the focuses back were it belongs unlike Bush, Clinton and all of the other irresponsible politicians who started a war with a innocent country. THEY ARE THE WARMONGERS! All you guys seem to have your own agenda trying to tear down Obama! I bet you this, if you ask any of the presidential contenders if they would take the opportunity to get a criminal terrorist they would say YES! If they didn’t say yes the press and voters would have a field day saying they are weak on terror. Even Giuliani agreed with Obama on Charlie Rose last night. If Clinton or any Republican came out and said this everyone would be ecstatic! If some thing happened again everyone would want to know why the government isn't doing anything. Like crabs in barrel you HATER'S just want to support your own choice president or agenda! You’re just a little jealous your spineless corrupt candidate did not speak up sooner! Before you tear down Obama how about you learn where your politician of choice stands on the tough calls. If it were you mom, spouse or father who died on 911 you all would be screaming for justice. This crap against what Obama is saying is a slap in the face of the victim’s families and the soldiers that died for no good reason in this stupid war against innocent people! OBAMA IS REAL! BELIEVE THAT!

All I can say is THANK GOD none of you are making the decisions that guide the fate of our country!

this is just a ploy to try get americas cricket team in the running... australia is next

Hey as a pakistani citizen i respect Obama's opinion on turning against pakistan. But I think Obama is forgetting one thing and that is "It was none other then us Pakistani, who supported you when the time was rough
against US". Don't forget that our President and our General is what we call a manly man who out of all odds going against him reached out his hands and pully you out through the rough patches of Afghanistan. Did you forget already that without Pakistani intelligence you could not even survive a month in that part of the world. I think you have forgotten about RUSSIA. It was Afghanistan who dismember Union of Sovie Socialist Republic in 13 small states. I think obama needs to go back and take some history lessons before make any decisions against anyone. Re-check your facts and figures then talk. It is totally uncool to point fingures at others when you sir, yourself needs to check yourself first.

They are right about Obama. He is naive and inexperiences. He talks like Bush, wants to sound tough and attack anyone who disagrees. Hasn't he learned anything from Bush and all those liars currently in the Administration.

It's amazing how many experts we have on this blog concerning foreign policy and the war on terror. Where do you get your intelligence from? Please reference the last intelligence briefing you received. You all are political idiots! Talk about naive.

It's amazing how many people post remarks about Obama, both positive and negative. It goes to show you he truly is THE MAN. People love to hate him. It only happens to the best!

I think it's important that Senator Obama's complete speech is read. The media has put their own spin on what was a great speech that does not say he will invade Pakistan. It partly reads, "As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.
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.
And Pakistan needs more than F-16s to combat extremism. As the Pakistani government increases investment in secular education to counter radical madrasas, my Administration will increase America's commitment. We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists' program of hate is met with one of hope. And we must not turn a blind eye to elections that are neither free nor fair - our goal is not simply an ally in Pakistan, it is a democratic ally...."

End one war and start another??? Obama, You lost my vote.

On Woodrow Wilson's 100 years on creating foundation of American Foreign Policy "Make the world safe for democracy":
I think there's a major flaw in this line....it needs revision. It should read like "Make safer democracies for the world".

To kill the Fanatics, Obama's strategy will create Counter-Fanatics, that is a new class of Fanatics. Both groups, opposite and poles apart, but both still fanatics. You cannot dig a hole to fill another. I think enlightened people of US never deserved to burn their sons in the War on Terror. It is thrown upon them by American political oligarchy and corprate interest groups. There is no best loyal ally of US than Pakistan. Pakistan supported US Cold War and helped dissolve USSR despite its internal and regional conflicts (when India and Iran were and still Pro-Russians). There's no best resource than Pakistani expertise to understand the global war on terror scenario. Pakistan is more affected by America-led war on terror. More Pakistani's are killed in Suicide bombings with in Pakistan than Americans killed within US. US should understand that its time to help Pakistan become stronger. Stronger Pakistan will be able to better control the terrorism and keep it locked and contained far away from US soil.

United States is a great nation so this land's forefathers. It needs great leaders with vision to bring world closer together not the divisive leaders who tear the world apart. I strongly believe that if we spend the same amount of money we spent on humans killings (in the name of war on terror and so on for subsequent arms race)to relieve the global warming, the world would be a great living place. We, as Americans, as leaders of the world, have far more greater goals to go for. We have to lead the world by example, by our moral example, not by fear and counter fear chain reaction. Lets not waste our energies into these things and let's not change the living heaven into burning hell!

Kamran.

This is just great! We're losing one fight... lets try with another country! Iraq is just as small as a bean, if you look at Pakistan! There are living 156,7 mio. people in Pakistan (26 mio. in Iraq). It would be completely idiotic to go in to Pakistan. As someone not coming from the United States, i'm kind of worried to see not only Republicans but now also Democrats have no knowledge of the world outside the United States. If he does get elected and start a war against an ally, he would make United States more isolated (if it's possible) in the world, than they all ready are. So i beg you Americans... Vote for Clinton-rather you like her or not she is the only candidate who has great knowledge about the world and would be able to have a responsible foreign policy.

As a moderate Pakistani studying in the US, I am highly disappointed with Mr. Obama. It shows to me that he has little sense of geopolitics and foreign policy.
Only in the last few weeks, several Pakistan army soldiers and officers have died in suicide bombings and terrorist attacks.
Since 2001, several hundred Pakistan army troops have died fighting terrorists. In fact, Pakistan has the second highest number of casualties second to only the US in the "war on terror". None of this gets reported in the mainstream US media.
Most Pakistanis, like myself, have no sympathy whatsoever for violence but we do dearly love our country.The sad fact is that Mr Obama has fallen prey to ignorance.

Why is it that the only Politician who wants to end the war and change our foreign policy so as not to endanger the United States is Ron Paul? These people who are running need to understand that we didn't vote in Democrats to see the war run from the Dem perspective. The war in Iraq is a mismanaged mistake, hitting another country like Pakistan would bring such world wide contempt that we would be bigger targets that before, only this time, nobody would sympathize with us.

How do you invade/ attack troops in a country with declared nuclear weapons, half a million army, an airforce, longe-range missiles finally a population of 160 million people.

Just to be clear, iraqs population by comaprison is a 40 million....

I was hoping to vote for Obama but now I have changed my mind.

Many here have expressed support for launching a military campaign in Pakistan. I am highly skeptical that this would be at all successful. Consider the following:

1. Pakistan has nuclear weapons.
2. If Pakistan is destabilized, then Jihadists might gain control of those nukes.
3. What steps could be taken to ensure that intervention in Pakistan doesn't have an outcome similar to the campaign that Israel waged against Hezbollah last summer, or worse?

Ok here is how it works. you are in charge of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan what some claim is the most rugged and goforsaken land on earth. how do you get by? well you can get by by ferrying things over the border or by sheltering people in the impossible to reach places where you live. if you live in the most inaccessible place on earth an plenty of people are happy to pay you to keep it that way you will not take kindly to the other local strongmen, in this case Musharaff trying to crack down, so you do what you can to put him on the defensive. but what if everyone was watching? crime often happens in the worst neighborhoods because no one cares, but if the tribal lands were scrutinized and the U.S. could attack there at will then if I were a terrorist I would move somewhere else. Somewhere less conspicuous. For the U.S. to exercise a zero tolerance policy for terrorism makes it harder for those ensconced in the region to linger. A Pakistan rid of foreign terrorists and autonomous tribal leaders is a more stable and secure Pakistan. Obama is doing them a favor. That is at least one way of looking at it.

So Obma want to invade another country and the Dems call tat Leadership? LOLROF THe left is willing to talk tough and fight a war where we have no troops. NO WAR UNLESS A DEMOCRAT IS PRESIDENT should be your new motto,

What's all the rumpus about? Come on in...invade my country. The people here have done nothing but fight for centuries. Its their core competency so to speak. And right now they are killing each other...and when you come in they'll kill you...only it will hurt more than iraq considering that the country has the 7th largest population in the world.

The tribal regions (terror havens) that we often read and talk about have always been autonomous (read independent) and they always will be. Niether the pakistani government nor the american government can do anything about it unfortunately. The only way to tame them is to kill them all or buy them...and prior to the US...the soviet union and the british have tried to control them with force with little success. Money is the only answer...give them something better to do than fight.

Finally one last thought...how many people around the middle east must die before 3000 american lives are avenged? I mean hello...since the war on terror began the number of people killed in all theatres of action has been 100s of times more than 3000. And all for what? Is the world really safer?

I call this extreme incompetence and a hurrah for people who follow this kind of idiotic ideologies.For starters, living in posh mansion and studying in Ivy leage schools Does not make you a expert on Intl relations and that is exactly why we stand where we are!
Pakistan is a ally and has been a ally, much tested and proven to every test than any other so called allies that we have. What has ever israel done for USA? they bombed one of our aircrafts and have tried to steal our secrets many many times. All other arab allies are comwards and corrupt. Pakistan has proven its role in Afghan war and is the only country which was the biggest force in ending the cold war.
People who support obama on these comments live thousands of miles away from war lands and pakistan and have no idea what so ever that how it is to win hearts of people and countries who are constantly teasesd by media and our government wrongfully. The way our embassies and consulates behave with other nationals is embarassing and disgusting, and trust me no diplomacy or aid can offer remedy to the way our media portrays other nations and how our foriegn service officers behave with their nationals. And then we say, do this , do that! i am sorry , are we an empire now????

Wow....I'm appalled that in the year 2007, with the internet and information at our fingertips, so many people posting here are so ignorant. Are you too lazy to READ the speech before forming an opinion ABOUT the speech? What is wrong with you people? This is the exact reason why 41% of Americans believe SADDAM was behind 9/11.

God help us all...ignorance will undo our beloved nation.
Do yourselves a favor and READ the speech...Jesus Christ!

I'm also appalled that CNN is misleading readers with the headline, and is not pointing out that Hillary has the exact same position as Obama when it comes to striking at Al Qaeda within Pakistan's borders....CNN is in the tank for Hillary.

Pathetic.

I do believe Obama shot himself in the foot with that comment. Americans are plain sick of WAR and he's already rallying for lighting yet another? He hasn't even offered a well thought out plan to get out of Iraq. Please, no more gun slinging shoot em ups in the White House.

The statement from obama ("We will destroy the terrorist camps in Pakistan")will make him the first choice for Indian Americans. If Ms. Clinton is called as 'the senetor from Punjab' Obama will be called as the 'Defense Minister of India'.
Obama will be serving both Oldest and largest democracies if elected as the President. Hope he will remember his words (All terrorist camps including the ones in Pakistani Kashmir)

In less than two weeks, Obama has made two significant statements that show he is not ready for the game of international politics. Trouble is, he may be playing the game of American politics very well.

Meeting with any foreign leader under any circumstances is not something the President of the United States for both international and national political reasons. We have issues with some of these countries and they do need resolutions. We should not be willing to let our issue with Cuba remain where it is for the next ten years. The Cuban people are not our enemies and the hard feelings between our government and their government need to die before Catro dies. But the next American President does not need to get on a plane to Havanna right after his inaguration.

Attack Pakistan? I know you want to look tough, but brother (and I mean that as a fellow American, a Christian and a black man) you were way better off looking smart.

We've elected a tough, if not so smart President. Now, we (the American people) are looking for a smart President. We think you are pretty smart, but, I didn't need any news analyst to tell me that Hilliary gave the smarter answer in the debate.

When you start getting bombed for this tough stance on Pakistan, look around the room and ask your people who came up with this idea: "Did you used to work for Bush 43?" That will give you two reasons to fire them for coming up with this tough stance. 1. If they answer yes, then they weren't smart or loyal enough to work for Bush. 2. If they answer no, then they don't have the strength of mind to recognize that Pakistan is a country which could very easily lead the world into nuclear war, not because they have anything against us, but because if the wrong guy were to replace a Musharif destablized by aggressive US actions in western Pakistan, there might be a big problem in eastern Pakistan along the disputed border with India and so you fire them for not considering that.

After all, isn't the problem with the Bush administration that they didn't consider all of the possible consequences of their actions.

Obama is absolutely correct. He should be our next President. He is excellent. I appreciate his courage.
Obama told the truth and he gave the exact solutions for the threats. Please think indipendently and fairly before going for 2008 choice. Choose this courageous man for leading us.

Mr. Naive is trying to act tough to redeem his embarrasment from his obvious lack of experience or should I say ignorance of diplomacy and foreign policy. Too late for this tough talk. I don't think voters are dumb & foolish to fall for his never-ending 'spin'. And by the way, I never see any sense of humility from this simpleton. How sad for him thinking that he can win the presidency. That will never happen Mr. Naive!

Since when is going after Bin Laden a bad idea? Obama spoke about "taking action", which doesn't necessarily mean a full scale invasion (in the same way Bill Clinton took action by attempting to take out Bin Laden with a missle strike). Anyone saying that Obama was specifically condoning a full-scale invasion of Pakistan is just spouting spin at this point.

so we should just let Osama chill live free as he pleases while you sit at home and wait for his next attack! lol come there are way more people living in Iraq way more and look what that plan has gotten us. You know you people are never satisfied and yet you have all the answers. You live in fear at home and care more about pakistan and saying it will destabilize the entire middle east? LOL come on there is no rule over there and we put so much trust in Musharrah and say "oh its so deilcate over there" well your saftey and your american citizens saftey is delicat too just ask Bin Laden! Ok so what should America do? Since you seem to hold a cabinet seat or something.

Wait, let me get this straight. Obama's plan for our nation is to invade a country (which, at this point in time is an ally) that is unstable and has nuclear weapons. I may only be 17 but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that something tells me that invading an ally with nuclear weapons is generally not a good idea. I think Obama has faulty intelligence... his own.

James point is good except that he missed the part where Obama said he would keep some troops in Iraq to fight extremists and help the Iraqi government gain stability. How many would he leave in? From my reading of his speech it shounds like he will reduce troop strength be at least two brigades. Those two brigades would go to Afganistan. So we wouldn't have to go back into Iraq, because we'll still be there.

Anyone disagree that this is what Obama said?

We should all take vacations to Pakistan. I'm sure we'll all be welcome with open arms (guns). Maybe we get to keep our heads on the way home. READ THE SPEECH people. Never mind...just vote Hillary. She is blessed by the media and obviously represents the majority of the public who also doesn't like to read important information(NIE, Obama's speech). Why read when you have headlines or staff to give you cliff notes. :0

Obama is a nice guy but he is saying things for political mileage. Those Obama supporters who have to talk in bold and caps are showing their desperation.

Change for the sake of change is meaningless. Change must be based on facts and understanding of how the world works, not how US citizens sensitive mindset works. Obama is playing to the sensitive mindset.

Here is a thought. Obama has been in Senate for a while and he has never asked tough questions or engaged in serious discussions with Ambassadors of rogue countries. And he says will talk in the first year of Presidency? Why? Because he can cast himself as different.

Well act first if you want to be different, dont be lazy to do good things only if we offer you White House. I think Obama is showing he is as opportunistic as all political starters are.

Hope is good, Reality is much better. Hope is fluff, Reality is substance.

I think Obama just lost my vote. This guy talks a lot about the war in Iraq and now he wants to go to war against Pakistan?? You are kidding right??

Invading Pakistan, what an insane thinking?, but Obama is correct that we should have first cleared pakistan-afgan border, even before thinking of attacking Iraq for 9/11. Because that border region was used to plan, train, co-ordinate not just 9/11, but even now at this moment there may be some plans going on to attack various parts of world.

But Pakistan is not Iraq or Afghanistan to think of to invade. I agree this carrot and stick method used by Bush administration is not working, and if that area is not cleared quickly, then it will permanently put the world in danger. I feel first we need to change Army regime in Pakistan, and then put extreme pressure……

Attacking Pakistan tribal area will be a big mess. Pakistan's people and government wants more than Amercian to kick those foreign terrorist out of their land but its not easy. Have we been able to get Taliban and Al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan where we have the control?? We need to provide those intelligence to Pakistanis to get rid of these terrorist. This is the only way out. Nevertheless, Pakistan has sacrificed more troops in the fight against Taliban and Al-Qaeda than Americans. Why dont we appreciate these facts rather then blindly calling Pakistan a non-ally.

Him. Let me cross him off the list of candidates I support. He is just as bad as the right wing. Supporting any sovereign nation is against international law, is unconstitutional, and is immoral. Obama would use nukes too. How can we support these war-mongers.

Right now Paul, Gravel, and Kucinich are the only candidates following the constitution, following their religion, and following international law. You're nothing Obama, go join Rudy, Hilary, Fred, John, and Mitt as moronic idiots who deserve nothing but prison time.

That Obama kid is more than naive, he's totally stupid and out of the realities of today's world. Would the US army TRY to invade Pakistan, it would be CRUSHED like never before. Viet Nam would look like garden party in comparison. And don't forget that China is one of the main economic and strategic partner of Pakistan !

So easy to make a scapegoat of Pakistan to justify to total inability of the army to do his "job" in Afghanistan. Typically american !

Enough of US imperialism ! The Fascist United States of America have become the greatest threat to the world stability. All that because a bunch of satanic governing corporate leaders want to fill even more their pockets. Nevermind if thousands of innocent people have to be bombed, nevermind if whole countries must be destroyed, if it's for the "good" of America, eh ?
I wish American people would have balls and stand against their government, if not uproot it. Yeah, one good American civil war would bring some fresh air to the world! Alas most are brainless cowards who are too much scared to loose their sofa/TV-set and SUV. One day will come when America will have to pay for all the suffering and destruction it has brought to the world. And all the America's Gold and weapons won't help in anyway, because the bill will be of Divine origin. Patience, the monster is due to die !
Viva la Libertad ! Death to the Tyrans !

I don’t understand how this is any better than the current situation we are in. We are still entrapped in an intangible and unwinnable “war”. Rather than attacking Iraq, we’ll attack Pakistan. Same war different country. Our focus should rather be rectifying this “war on terror” which is illegitimate and corrorsive. By promoting a war against an ideology, we are entrapping ourselves in a war that can never be won. You can kill the man but never the idea.

Actually you can , but you have to have the guts to play a nasty game even more nasty than the foe. If they do not fear death, teach them the meaning. They murder 12 innocents in Baghdad, hang 120 of their captured buddies. They bomb a market and kill 50, hang 500. It would stop in a hurry. But the oil lobby does not want the Iraqi war to end. Nor does the Administration have the guts to do it right. Their oil friends have stolen 60B$ in Iraqi oil during the current regime's occupation. A broken Iraq allows this rape to continue. And it WILL continue as long as Chaney is the President, oops, forgot the lapdog in chief. They will get their kick backs after they leave office.

[...] Obama: Shift fight to Afghanistan, Pakistan [image] Obama discussed his ideas for fighting terrorism on Wednesday. WASHINGTON (CNN) –Sen. Barack Obama says he [...]

The terrorists are only one bomb away from removing Bush's buddy in Pakistan. Only billions a year in give aways have kept our friendly dictator in power. The longer he is there the more they will hate the US once he is dead. If our worthless W does not have a plan to put boots on the ground there when he dies to grab the nukes he built with his own pooe people's sweat, while American funds were holding up his regime, then the 9-11 attack will be small potatos. The terrorists will test that bomb in NYC. If this war in Iraq were not for the oil and juvenile family pride, this group along the Afgan border would have been crushed years ago. Thanks to Acting President Chaney and the 59 million fools that voted for it, we are indeed less safe than on 9-11.

So what happens when the terrorists shift bases to Iran, and then North Korea and then Syria .... ? And he is talking about giving the same military force that has failed terribly in Iraq, an order of magnitude bigger challenge Frankly the US military has a lot to prove before they can be set off on a grandiose plan to conquer the world.

To start with, I am a fan of both Clinton and Obama but when i read the different posts, i found many people just do a comment blindly without reason and this is largely due to the fact that sides have been taken and we just take whatever the guy on my side say to be unmistakeable. an example is from the debates, I wonder why nobody noticed Senator Joe Biden's oustanding performance so far. When i first read the CNN article i became disappointed in Obama despite the fact that I just like this guy. But when Lavelle refers us to read the entire article from "http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php" I found it was a great speech that the media have distorted for God knows why.
my point is we should try as much as possible to reason out of context the subject instead of blindly following candidates. Senator Clinton was clearly wrong in the last issue of name calling cos within context they were actually saying the same thing except that she changed her mind.
God Bless america

Mr Obama you are a man without substance. You have spoken about your foreign policy and you quite honestly look dumb and ill-prepared to lead us anywhere but further chaos.

I think you must be trying to prove something or making someone happy. I am not sure how can any sensible american vote for you knowing how knee jerk and shallow your perception of the world is.

I do not believe america is ready for the _change_ you have been touting in your candidacy. You've got nothing better on the war-mongering Bush-Cheney philosophy.

Has the Democratic Party lost its mind, or just its soul? Just please remember what our real veterans have sacrificed over the years for this country. Not Barack Obama; and where do you think he will generate all the capital to fund all these battles he specks of? I personally do not think he has the experience or mussels too handle what he is proposing and/or promising. Sounds just all his colleges (cronies); likened too mercantile shop keepers in disguise from Iraq as well with all the rest of our senators today. Most beguiling among the crowed seats in the house and the halls in congress of mendacity is none other than President George w. Bush and his counterfeit war polices reach all the back to his ill gotten presidency. I just cannot believe some of the just that is circulating today and how gullible people are today. Do you really think that man wrote the speech all by his lonesome?

Is he just plain nutty? Or should he be getting information from Sparks Collage of Useless Knowledge! If he thinks we need to go after Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing a battle on that turf is death senescence’s not only for our troops in Iraq; we all will suffer the same fate.

Hi all, I was enraged when i read the CNN post but when i checked out the full speech at "http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php" i couldn't but feel so proud of Obama.

I think we need to ask the question. What is the media after. TO wreck this guy by distorting what he had said? I think this kind of journalism should not just go unchecked.

Obama didn’t say we were going to go to war AGAINST Pakistan, or even Afghanistan. He said were going to get “on the right battlefield”. He also spoke of developing partnerships and drying up terrorist support. He’s talking about wrapping up the Iraq mess, making the right deals with our Allies, and fighting WITH them (not AGAINST them) against the real threat (which is and always has been the REAL Al Qaeda), and finally getting Bin Laden, and getting even for 9/11! He’s talking about not acting like we need Musharraf’s permission to fire a cruise missile at a meeting of terrorists! Now I KNOW I’m voting for him, here in the Iowa primary!

Any such action would be seen as an act of war, an act of war against a nuclear capable ally. What crack is he smoking? Arent things unstable enough in Pakistan as it is without launching a strike against soverign territory? What would such a stirke achieve? Probably the distruction of a few bildigs/tents and the deaths of a handful of zealots who will be quickly replaced. Juxtapose the "pros" with the "cons" which are thus:

1)The loss of any cooperation from Pakistan
2)Destabilisation of a nuclear armed state
3)A certainty of very serious retaliation from Pakistan against US interests in the region not least from the ISI

I think recent history has shown that world isnt simple and you cant use force to resolve every problem. Terrorism can only be stopped by ceasing indoctrination into the ideology. Blowing up some buildings/tents in Pakistan is not going tp achieve that.

I'd expect such a glib, cheap soundbite from Donald Rummsfeld not Barack Obama.

Doesn't matter if we aren't invading Pakistan. Any direct military action by the US with the backing of the Pakistani government will further destabilize Pakistan. If you read the news some of you people might understand how fragile the situation is in Pakistan. But of course the fact that some radical portion of the Pakistani goverment could end up with nukes isn't that big a deal.

To top it all off by pulling out of Iraq you are guaranteeing yourself one hell of a mess which we will end up having to go back in and clean up. As it stands we are keeping Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia from backing their respective sides. We are also to some extent keeping Turkey from going in and beating the crap out of the Kurds in general.

Obama's plan would be nicely titled "The Total Destabilization of the Middle East and Destruction of the American Economy" because the price of oil as it stands will only be a happy dream once the top blows of this kettle.

But like they say, a people who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it. And the US has forgotten all the lessons they have learned from the Civil War up to and including World War II

Sorry guys, 'our allies in Pakistan' don't control the region that Obama is talking about. Northern Pakistan is a virtual anarchic state controlled by warlords and religious fantastics. Musharraf is afraid to quell that 'quiet rebellion' and his weakness has produced another pre-9/11 Afghanistan that is destabilizing the entire region. Launching strikes within that area would not be viewed as an act of war by Islamabad. It would make Musharraf nervous for his own sake, yes, but that region is, for all intents and purposes, a rogue state independent of Pakistan. With that said, it's simply common sense to pursue actionable intelligence into the region. Though I do understand Republican fears of that day when a Democratic President brings Osama bin Laden to justice.

Barack Obama is so right on this issue. I hope everyone is listening.

OBAMA 08!

After thinking about this a bit. I do think Obama overreached a little. The chances of there being overwhelming actionable intelligence sufficient to risk offending/destabilizing Pakistan is slim. If there were such intelligence, then yes, we should take action. But the reality is that it is unlikely we will ever have that intelligence (without Pakistani assistance). So, it may score some political points domestically, but I think it is more realistic to simply state that we should focus on finishing the job in Afganistan. That includes action in territories belonging to Pakistan, but the reality is that it is only going to happen with joint US/Pakistan action. Politically, it is probably good for the US audience to say what he said, but it is just talk.

Having said that, I appreciate Obama's views and I regard him highly.

I cant say it enough. Be informed before you vote, blog, or even open your mouth.

I feel he is being mis quoted. I slightly disagree about his solution but he is right on the money with his claims.

Read his speech before commenting on it.

Is Mr Obama out of his mind? To send unwanted troops to (or start military actions in) a foreign country, in this case Pakistan) makes him no better than the individual who currently resides in the White House. I am no particular fan of Ms Clinton but I had hoped that Mr Obama would be a candidate I could vote for. With naive foreign policy views such as the above I will have to write him off as a potential for President.
The Democrats seem to have shot themselves in the foot. I did not particularly want to vote in another Republican but Fred Thompson is rapidly becoming my candidate of choice.

All of these senators and so-called experts coming out against Obama are frauds! Dodd, Biden and Clinton stood before the American public vowing to get the terrorist then authorize a war with a country that has nothing to do with Sept 11! Then when Obama lays down the law and tries to focus back on the original mission they attack him. They say don’t announce when you are going to attack. To you frauds out there it’s a punk move to hit a man when he's not looking. This is why the world hates us! A real man or woman will look you in the face and say what's real. Obama did not say he wants war he want justice! He's a real senator and soon to be president!

This battle between Obaby and Hillarious is just precious.

I for one am thoroughly looking forward to watching them tear each other to shreds! Will make for some great TV!

Thank you for making so clear the dirrerence between Pundits er, I mean politicians, and people. The fact that no news organization has put on anyone who actually agrees with Obama's position on pakistan: just say what you mean: "Silly naive negro..." What would people have said right after 9-11 if some politcian would have oppossed such a strike when we knew exactly where Bin Laden is like we do now? I didn't here ANY of your pundits talking about what an assenine idea going into Iraq would be in 2003. This is the first time I have ever considered voting for Obama stricly for your reaction to him; for the "naivite" of speaking the truth plainly without regard for the kabalistic "knowledge" that some truth should not be spoken. The fact that we (and your orgnization suporting it essentially) as a nation are willing to attack a nation showing not to have had any impact on national security until now, but unwilling to attack a nation we know to be harboring Bin Laden himself because they have a nuke....what message does that send to the world? GET A NUKE and we won't attack you! Wake up. Your propagada like support for the status quo is undermining our national security!, jeremyneill@earthlink.net, jeremyneill@mac.com

I believe other politicians have said this same thing before. Even republicans have describe this same "new" plan. Obama is clearly not cut out to be my president. HIp HIp HILLARAY!!!

Great......another idiot to lead us into another conflict. Hey! Did anyone ever think that if we left Pakistan alone that they would just maybe leave us alone? Obama supporters, please make sure you know everything about the person your voting for.

Fitting that he would deliver this speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, since it was Wilson's "scholarship" that embarked 100 years of "making the world safe for democracy." Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq prove the implausibility of that notion. It seems, Obama is intent on more of the same–more war, more fear-mongering, more robbing of U.S. social programs to bolster foreign markets and "democratic" dictatorships. Yawn.

To the blogger that wrote Obama was the only senator that he knew that didn't vote for the war, what world are you living in? Obama was not a U.S. Senator when we went to war. He didn't have a vote in the matter. Further more, anyone that wants to go over and rumble with Pakistan who is surrounded by nuclear weapons capable countries is nuts! Obama's reactionary bloggers should go on back to school. This time learn something about politics and the rest of the world.

To all of the racist on this post...

Newsweek
A new study finds that blacks on death row convicted of killing whites are more likely to be executed than whites who kill minorities. It also concludes that blacks who kill other minorities are less likely to be executed than blacks who kill whites. The authors of the report say their findings raise serious doubts about claims that the U.S. criminal justice system is colorblind.

If Bin Laden was black and we had no intrest in the Middle East he would be done! The reason not to go after him is because of money and political control. The more money and political power people make off of the fear of Bin Laden the longer he chills in the shade sipping iced tea. Wake up America!

Once again, people are rushing to condemn Obama's position without even reading his entire speech. Even our lazy ass media and the pundits...no one has taken the time to actual READ the damn speech before rushing out with incorrect headlines about what Obama said. I'm particulary annoyed that the same people on the right who supported Homeland Security Adviser Fran Townsend when she said the exact same thing 2 weeks ago on the Sunday talk shows are now expressing this fake outrage at Obama.

Where is the intellecual honesty in this country? At least Obama is being honest in what his approach will be, and I'm sure he knew he would get attacked for it.

I'm reading comments on some blogs about this from people who obviously have not taken the time to READ THE SPEECH, and they are going on about Obama advocating a unilateral invasion and occupation of Pakistan and bla bla bla.

I feel so sad that we as Americans have become so lazy when it comes to getting the information critical to making important decisions such as picking a President. Obama did not advocate some reckless policy...it's a well thought out and realistic policy that weighs the realities of relations with Pakistan against the critical need to destroy Al Qaeda which is propped up by Pakistan.

I tried to post the entire speech like 10 times earlier when the negative headline was up and the moderator removed my post each time. As far as im concerned CNN IS NO LONGER A CREDIBLE NEWS SOURCE. Its obvious that they are not PROVIDING THE PUBLIC WITH AN UNBIASED POSITION REGARDING THE MOST IMPORTANT NEWS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY.

I WONDER WHO ACTUALLY HAS THEIR HANDS IN CNN"S POCKETS ANYWAYS> I've always pictured it to be some crazy old coot with a long white beard and hair, and a long white smock, held up in a germ free bio-hazard proof stable type room on the top floor of some huge building or like a mile below the earths crust just pushing buttons to have robots do his/her (her? cmon seriously) bidding.

I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT ANYONE IN THE MEDIA IS ABLE TO SLEEP AT NIGHT ANYMORE, THEY SHOULD ALL BE HAVING HAUNTING NIGHTMARES.

Thank you CNN for changing the heading to this thread. I cannot believe that what I once felt a very respected news reporting station would misrepresent the truth like that. I always felt that many of the other channels were not giving us honest news, or were swaying it towards one political party or person. Then to see that CNN manipulated words so much, it worried me. I have come to be so discouraged by how the Bush administration manipulated facts and people's emotions to get what they wanted...a war that we DID NOT need to be in and quite possibly an election. I thought we were getting through that kind of country. To me Obama represents change. We so need change in Washington. What worries me about today's prior headline in this thread is that there are so many, many ignorant people in this country. They will live with that headline just as they still live with Iraq being involved in 911- a complete NON TRUTH. Manipulation causes so much difficulty and we cannot afford to have it influence the "#1's anymorem there are way too many ignorant, quick to judge people in our country. I am trying to be patient as a #2....one who never supported Bush's stance and saw what he was doing VERY early on. Please report news correctly for all of our sake.

People, what would you call the attack of the twin towers? Would you say; it was an attack of the twin towers only or that it was an attack on the U.S? Once you invade another country, it's an attack on that country. I don't care if it's hillside, mountains, rivers or whatever, you go into that country and it's an attack on that country. Please let's vote someone in with some common sense and just a little intelligence.

Glad CNN finally changed the headline. Maybe this will get more people to actually read the whole story and THEN comment on it.

Hey, look! CNN bowed to pressure and changed the headline. LOL!

Why do people continue to post mindlessly without reading previous posts or, GASP, the actual speech itself? HE DIDN'T SAY HE WOULD ATTACK PAKISTAN!!!!! HE SAID WE WOULD GO ATTACK THE TERRORISTS IN THE UNGOVERNED REGIONS OF PAKISTAN ONLY IF PAKISTAN DIDN'T DO IT THEMSELVES!!!! Even Bush wouldn't attack Pakistan, and Obama is about 100 times smarter than Bush. OBAMA NEVER SAID HE WOULD ATTACK PAKISTAN!!!!

"Were not attacking Pakistan.."

Exactly. We'd strike Al Qaeda elements inside Pakistan if Musharraf fails to act in time.

Read for comprehension, Righty.

We're not lazy, we're stupid. Obama is not talking about invading Pakistan. Reading comprehension will be our downfall. As far as talking with Cuba, Iran and the others.....Sun-tzu Chinese general & military strategist said "keep your friend close, but your enemies closer."

You can't end a war by starting new ones. Someone like Obama has a quick tongue and it's obvious no thought process. We need to gain our respect back in the international community and simultaneously strategize on how to go after terrorism. We're more likely to get anti-terrorism support if the international community respects us. It's a big world, we can't do it alone...even though some cowboys think we can.

obama doesnt even know how much is pakistan doing in the war of terror, he is just being a jerk

I really know in politic people only like to hear the nice thinks they'll never see in the reality.Just faux thinks.Obama said nothing wrong.He never said he will invade Pak.he said
if Pak refuses to end the terroriste activities We will.In my SENS ,Obama is too much serious to do politic.People dont like someone w/honesty.

I just wana say one small thing to you guys Pakistan consists of 90 % moderate muslims who dont even give a damn about the extremists but when you would attack Pakistan our country would face 100 % exterimist to defend Pakistan which is not an ordinarry county it has a 200 million population 4 biggest army in the whole work, airforce, navy, nuclear capabilites intercontinenatal nuclear capiable missles they would bring the war to the US and would slaught every soldier we would put on Pakistan ground as this country would be the biggest country which the US face after Germany in the world wars with so much stregth so 10 % extermist would then be represented by the whole population of the country and pluss Pakistan back is covered by China who would never let US attach Pakistan.

I support Obama, but you can't fault him for his words. President Bush has left him, or any other candidate with no other choice than to continue the war on terror.

He will leave Iraq which is great and use strong intelligence to make an educated and calculated move into Pakistan (if necessary). I'm sure he will work with the Pakistani government to get things done. It is the American people who are naive thinking that he would be quick to judgment and cause us future instability. You have to learn to see through rhetoric.

And anyone who makes up their mind, Republican or Democrat, before learning all of the facts - is a fool. There are things I agree with Republicans on and things I agree with Democrats on, but I will ultimately vote for whom I feel will bridge that gap and make policies to that effect.

To me Obama seems to be that person, however I was rather impressed with Chris Dodd and John Edwards as well.

Let me start by saying I would love to see a president of COLOR in office but the unfortunate part is that with all the remarks and slander, and he is not even in office, I don't think it's going to happen. I also want to say that the government is so messed up that it doesn't matter WHO is in office things are not going to get better and people are so quick to say he is this and that but no body is perfect and I'm sure if any one of these people who are posting negativity they would be WORST off than Obama in this situation. My words to Obama would be keep fighting and if you don't win it wasn't meant to be because someone might try and do something stupid. (wink,wink)

obama is an IDIOT neoconservative. Were not attacking Pakistan.. they have nuclear weapons. we dont attack countries with nuclear weapons. Obama would also ‘fight terrorsim’ by pre-emptively nuking Iran. this guy is no different than Bush.

Respose: I am I going crazy or did we not attack a country who was deemed to have weapons of mass destrcution! Isn't this what we were told? So its okay to attack a country that did not do anything to us but we can't take action against the people who attacked us. People who don't reconize the Pakastani government anyway. Obama did not say attack the country of Pakastan just use diplomatic and millitary efforts to go after those who attacked us on SEPT. 11th! All of this is stupid! Learn to face the truth instead of lies and spin America. If a republican or Clinton gave Obama's speach a parade would break out in every town. Obama is right!

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/ObamaHQ/CpHR full transcript of the speech

I love how everyone who commenst on here is a forgein policy expert. LEAVE IT TO THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY RESEARCH IT! Us stupid Americans have this misconception that we know whats right in terms of what's going on over there, when in reality, most of us have never set foot outside of this country. And if we have it hasn't been to some place like Iraq. I feel that they only people that should have jurisdiction here are the soldiers who are fighting the war and the people who have the ability to affect their course of action. I.E. the current administration (which is unlikely to happen) or the new democratic one (hopefully).

Obama '08

Hey it's BLACK BUSH!

when United States attacked iraq it was tottaly differnt military if u attack Pakistan and its 1 million strong army and not including all the out side force from all the muslim world who will join in the fight against U.S. there will be anew world war in hand

Nogibbons – blogspot writes,

"No. He wants to strike at “high-value terrorist targets” within Pakistan if President Musharraf fails to act. Read for comprehension, my friend."

For all you critics fuming because you think Obama's words are being taken out of context – HERE is what he said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets, and President Musharraf won’t act, we will"

How many of you brain-surgeons defending this statement REALLY think Musharraf, the Pakistani people, and the Muslim world is going to sit back and allow President Obama to order missiles strikes in Pakistan?

YOU have got to be kidding!

The reaction would be swift and severe. The calls for retaliation would swell causing a greater concern because of Pakistan's possession of tactical nuclear weapons. IF you think this is hogwash... how happy would YOU be if Pakistan lobbed a few missiles into New York City attempted to kill an anti-pakistani militant?

You'd be ok with that, eh?

Based on the wild and wide range of opinions, there is a general lack of historical and cultural understanding of the region of Pakistan under discussion. President Musharif struck a deal with the tribal leaders of the nortwestern tribal areas that he would not try to exercise control (where he had no control anyway) as long as they promised to police themselves and not support terrorism. This accord served the purpose of delaying the decay in support Musharif was/is experiencing for his administration by religious conservatives in his country, many of whom are high-level operatives in his own security apparatus, without whose support Musharif is greatly weakened, even though he still enjoys the firm support of the military who brought him to power. A triggering event in this sequence was the Red Mosque incident where over 100 extremeists were killed in Islamabad. Now, the tribal elders, who had never kept up their end of the bargain anyway, have announced that the "truce" is over. This may well give Musharif the political cover he needs to allow US intervention in the area, over the objections of his security apparatus and military, or at least the kick in the pants to take control of areas over which the central government has never had control before.
How does any of this reflect on Senator Obama's statement? At least the Senator recognizes the fact that we did not need to go to Iraq in the first place, and that we did not and have not finished the job in Afghanistan. Tribal entities do not recognize international borders unless it suits their purpose to hide. Sooner or later, the tribal areas of Pakistan will need to be cleaned out. Musharif is our best bet for cooperation in this effort.

I still do not think the Senator is our best choice for commander in chief.

For all of you idiots that think you can invade a nation like pakistan or iran....when was the last time you guys fought a war against a nation that actually had an army. American can't beat Iraq....Iraq, a country that you guys beat and bruise with economic sanctions and you think you can attack Pakistan. I think all of you forget they have the bomb and rest assure...they are not afraid to use it.
So far you have been lucky that they have been on your side in the "War on Terrorism" but basically America is just acting like a bully.
Everyone knows to beat the bully you just need to give him a bloody nose and he'll go running to his mom.
Good luck. Any invasion of Pakistan will result in a full all out war that will plunge the rest of the world into it and I'm sorry to tell you...America is -A- not the nice guys and -B- not going to win it.

CNN continues to fudge the facts....bravo.

Cnn could ya'll stop misleading the public with your bogus headlines especially the headline in which you accused Barrack Obama of wanting to start a War in Pakistan... If your going to report please report the whole story and stop taking snippets from his speeches and forming your own biased agendas.

Justin~

Gene- learn something about the region first please. Musharaf is a radical– just bc he doesnt want to have islamic law as the basis of the country does not make a non-radical. He tried to exile the Highest judge in the land bc the judge didnt think he should have control over the gov. and the army at once. HE TRIED TO EXILE THE CHIEF JUSTICE BC HE DIDNT AGREE WITH HIM– DOES IT GET ANY MORE RADICAL THAN THAT??? Also, this a man who won power by military coup and was supposed to give up control of the army a long time ago, bc that is what the people of pakistan want, but he refused after publicly saying he would. This is a leader who the entire middle class of Pakistan is railing against, and you are worried about "the radicals" that would overthrow pakistan, please. Give the people a little more credit, and try not being ignorant for a change... That goes for everyone posting here today and ESPECIALLY FOR EVERYONE MAKING COMMENTS BASED ON A HEADLINE!!!!! READ THE SPEECH< GET BACK TO US.

Cnn could ya'll stop misleading the public with your bogus headlines especially the headline in which you accused Barrack Obama of wanting to start a War in Pakistan... If your going to report please report the whole story and stop taking snippets from his speeches and forming your own biased agendas.

Justin~

Well said, Jordan of Seattle!!!! WELL SAID!

FINALLY – Someone is talking about Pakistan, which is clearly the biggest threat, by far, than Iran, Iraq or Afganistan.

Which country already has nukes?
Which country is headed by a rather unpopular man who was swept in to power by a coup>
Which country has a vast "no man's land" of territory that even their own government is afraid to police?

It seems like we are just one coup away from launch in Pakistan. About time this gets the exposure it needs.

BEING ABLE TO REASON IS A WONDERFUL THING...SERIOSULY.I CANT BELIVE WHAT SOME OF YOU PEOPLE ARE SAYING.....WERE DID OBAMA SAY HE WOULD INVADE PAKISTAN ??????? WERE ?????? WERE ????? I BEG YOU TO USE JUST A PORTION OF YOUR BRIAN BEFORE YOU REPLY....JUST A PORTION.

AND I FIND IT FUNNY HOW CNN ARE ATTACKING THIS MAN....EVERY OBAMA READ ON CNN HAS OR IS ABOUT SOMETHING HE SAID THAT IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN NEGATIVE.I AM NOT PRO OBAMA BUT IT IS EASY TO SEE JUST HOW RIDICULOUS CNN ARE.

Too many assumptions are being made about the tactics Obama wants to use in the region. He is just stating that the the people who hold the greatest threat to the US are in Afghanistan and Northwestern Pakistan. Here is expanded explination from the same speech.

"As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

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.

And Pakistan needs more than F-16s to combat extremism. As the Pakistani government increases investment in secular education to counter radical madrasas, my Administration will increase America's commitment. We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists' program of hate is met with one of hope. And we must not turn a blind eye to elections that are neither free nor fair - our goal is not simply an ally in Pakistan, it is a democratic ally. "

If you haven't read the speech, please do not post a comment. It is very clear which posts are from people who care enough about this to have read the speech and which are from people who prefer ignorance to thoughtful politics. Please state "I have read the speech and here are my comments" so that I can skip the comments from those who have not read it.

30% of us are stupid! And if you posted a knee-jerk reaction to a sound-bite headline, then guess which margin you find yourself in. R.E.A.D. what the man said. You got "the stupids" posting like he's launching nuclear missiles on Jan 22nd '09. (geez, this is exactly why this once proud country is in the crapper right now!)

This thread is ridiculous for two reasons.

On the one hand, you have a bunch of idiots reading taglines, making assumptions, and ignoring what Obama actually said. Now, I can understand people disagreeing with what he said after reading the full speech, but judging by the comments, pretty much nobody did.

Secondly, I find it pretty funny that Obama's biggest critics in these posts are quick to point out his so-called inexperience, and so criticize all his statements in regard to foreign policy. Of course, I guess they're just that much more knowledgeable than him.

Until Obama serves in the senate longer, he won't know what the common, poorly informed, voter already does I guess. All of you should send him foreign policy briefings, because apparently he wasn't gifted with the same common sense that you geniuses were.

I sincerely hope Obama realizes there is a distinct difference between a full scale war -and- what is currently occuring in Iraq.

I would like to hear him say – "when I'm president I will release the hounds of war. I will give orders to destroy anything that isn't wearing an American uniform."

As I see it, there are two kinds of people in the US:

1. Those who apparently can't read and, thus, base their opinions on brief news articles that spin what candidates say.

2. Those that search the whole truth, read candidate's speeches, reflect on what was said in its entirety (keyword), do their own research, and then form their opinions.

I'm a #2. Frankly, I'm really sick of having to deal with the presidents and laws voted for and supported by the #1s. We are outnumbered by these ignorant people.

To the #1's: think about the last time you voted. Chances are you were part of the 80% of people that originally voted FOR the war against Iraq. Learn from your mistakes. Think about who you want to vote for, then remember how WRONG you were before, and then change your vote to a more reasonable candidate.

To the #2's: patience, people, patience.

This is ridiculous posturing! Imagine just lobbing weaponry inside a sovereign nation!! This is crazier than Bush's policy of pre-emptive strike, particularly if you're only going after a rag-tag band of ragheads with only small arms thousands of miles away from the United States! By this knee jerk response to show he can be the Commander in Chief for the pollsters–he's not only making himself look even less statesman-like but a little reckless. Clearly, he isn't ready for the top job! As a conservative democrat (probably independent soon) I'm appalled.

"You can certainly see why not to vote for Obama with these kind of statements. So this is how he wants to thank one of United States best allies." – Posted By Joe Detwiler Maineville, Ohio

If ignorance like Joe weren't so widespread in this country, it would be pretty #&%*@ funny. Pakistan might be one of George Bush's greatest allies. But it sure isn't America's. Since when are countries that allow terrorists to train within their borders considered our "best allies"? It sounds like Joe should be in Bush's Cabinet.

OBAMA IS SOOOO SMART !!!

ENRAGE A NUCLEAR CAPABALE NATION LIKE PAKISTAN AND ITS ALLIES LIKE CHINA AND FRANCE.

YEH, LETS START A THIRD WORLD WAR.

Hillary is right, Obama is naive! What does he think would happen if US troops went into Pakistan musharrah would be overthrown in days and the radicals would have Pakistan's nukes. Look out anywhere in the world where these could be launched.

Obama must not know anything about this area of Asia and the volatility there. Where has he been during his five or so years in the Senate

"Let me get this straight. If a group of terrorist attacked us and hid in say…Mexico, and the Mexican gov’t refused capture them, we would give then a free pass? I understand now. We only respond to attackers if they hide in a country we don’t like. We’ll just wait for them to kindly move to a nation we’d like to attack or just surrender. Please don’t let the next attackers hide in Eygpt, Jordan, India, Saudi Arabia or any of our friendly African nations.

Obama DID NOT say attack the government of Pakistan. He said attack the terrorist within the borders of Pakistan. It doesn’t matter what he said, we are only going to read the HEADLINE. I’m worried for us…we are sooooo lazy to read.

Posted By Mr. Coffey, Raleigh, NC : August 1, 2007 11:29 am"

Thank God some of you like Mr. Coffey are paying attention and get it

Unfortunately most repubs just criticize Obama without actually reading what he said

There are a number of things that a lot of the "Obama is an idiot" camp seems to be missing (and yes, I'm lumping everyone who is taking aim at this latest statement into that category, as that's what it boils down to):

a)Pakistan isn't our friend, despite any assistance they may give us from time to time. They've harbored terrorists for years and the intelligence is out there that supports the fact that al-Queda is using the nation as its current base.
b)Why is it wrong to say one day that, as a leader, Barack would talk to leaders of these "rogue" states, and the next say that if talking doesn't work, he's not afraid to use the (still) all-powerful might of the United States military.
c)This isn't a "get the troops out of Iraq and into Pakistan" plan. This is a contingency plan and, honestly, one that should have been brought forth years ago. IF it were to be determined that Osama bin Laden was hanging out in Pakistan and Musharraf won't give him up or help drive him out, why shouldn't the United States strike? It's not like we'd be bombing Islamabad.

Fresh, intelligent ideas and a true devotion to seeing a change in the world... That's why Barack Obama should be the next President.

Unfortunately, it is this very naivety and gung ho approach that has created such a big mess to begin with – We made a mess in one country now let’s divert the attention to another country and make a bigger mess. Wars are good for the economy, right! Senator Obama, with this recent statement of yours, I must respectfully decline to vote for you.

Seeriously!!!! Someone show me where he said he was going to invade/pour troops into Pakistan. Churchill was correct when he said the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.. You people are ridiculous...
He is talking about tactical air strikes and special ops forces when, and only when, Musharraf doesnt act on his own accord. What is wrong with that?

No one said anything about attacking Pakistan! He said we should be willing to act and take out high level terroist targets in Pakistan if their goverment is unwilling to act. He is not proposing this is another Iraq or even another Afghanistan. He does not want to invade their cities, or overthrow their government. He just would rather put American interests over Musharraf's political concerns. That's it.

I remember our president standing on the World Trade center site proclaiming he was going to hunt down the terrorist who killed thousands of Americans. Republicans and Democrats and the world were behind that!

Now for all of the warped minds lets put the situation this way. If you mother father or spouse was killed by someone and the cops knew who did it and which house they are hiding in but decided to go after their next door neighbor instead because they just don't like them. What would you do? Furthermore to make it worse they taunt you every now and then with a video release. I don't care if you are the most candy liberal or strongest republican you would want to see justice done! If it happened to you would you say "Oh its warmongering to go after this confessed criminal who killed my spouse, mother or father? Or It's not a good political move to go after the criminal it might cause other crimainals to get mad at us. Obama is right!
Obama 08!

People can take jabs at democrats or buy into the image that Obama is naive but lets all be good Americans, put all of that aside and just think about this idea. Read what he said carefully. If your a republican and this is what Bush said we were going to do (he certainly implied it "with us or against us..") after 9/11 wouldnt this be something most of would support? Doesnt it make sense? Its disingenuous to say we're policing the world by going after the very people that attacked us and are threatening to do it again. Especially considering the convoluted reasoning we've been given to justify fighting the war on terror by attacking Iraq.
Lets give someone else a fresh chance at this finally, lets not inhibit the possibilities because Bush screwed it up so bad.

Wage war with Pakistan. Is he crazy.
They have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them over large distances.

The last thing we want is Osama pushing a button for an ICBM launch.

Obama vows to hunt down terrorists... The ones that actually planned the attacks of 9/11, not the fake ones fabricated to keep us hunkered down in the slums of Iraq.

Well done, Senator Obama!

So u want to pull ur troops from Iraq and plug 'em into Pakistan ??? And u think this will not create any more mess than it did in Iraq?? and u actually think this will eradicate terrorism once and for all?? and u think that US troops , after all the hitting it got in Iraq and Afghanistan, will be spared by Pakistan Army ?? Were u talking about Pakistan .. ur ally on war on Terrorism?? So lets get it straight ... u want to wage war on ur ally??
Man ... why did i ever believe u can make a better president???

Very well said by Obama.

Piss off our nuclear capabale alies (Pakistan) and make more enemies in the east.

What a cheap way to get to top of headline news by making a provocative statement against a country which has been our closest ally in war on terror!

Obama has no idea about the terrain where he _suggests_ Osama can be hiding. Why hasn't the US military with its trillions of dollars of surveillance equipment not provided any convincing intelligence on where Osama can be? Obama appears to be as naive as Bush. The latter invaded Iraq on faulty intelligence and now Obama wants to follow his blindness in preparing this nation for another war on un-proven and incomplete intel.

This country deserves a sensible leader and Obama is not one of them!

I am SO GLAD AND RELIEVED that SOMEONE has finally had the courage to step up and say that PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN ARE RESPONSIBLE for the state of IRAQ today. I was not very convinced by Mr. Barack Obama (incidently, his name Barack comes from the Arabic Muslim "Mubarak" or "baraka" – meaning "blessing" which makes sense considering his middle name is Hussein, so it would be "blessings on Hussein", something commonly said by Shite people) as a good candidate for president, but saying he will put troops into Paksitan to take out terrorists there, I am fully convinced is he is THE RIGHT CANDIDATE. Any future president NEEDS to absolutely think about taking out Pakistani terrorists in that country. They are running rampant there and all the training to kill people worldwide is coming from Pakistan and Afghanistan. But the bit about saying he will spend more money helping bail out Afghans, that part does not sit well with me. Haven't they been bailed out enough? If it had not been for Pakistani trained terrorists, we might not be trying to find Al Qaida in Iraq right now.

MUSHARAF IS GIVEN SOME ZILLION DOLLARS OF OUR TAX MONEY EVERY MONTH...JUST LIKE CHALABI WAS GIVEN SOME TRILLION IN DC FOR WRONG INFORMATION..SO WE COULD FIGHT A WAR WITH IRAQ..WHERE IS CHALABI??ASK CHENEY AND RUMSFELD...
SAD AFFAIR OF STATE ..

I am shocked by some comments made in here. People do not actually read the entire speech before posting a comment. He clearly said" if there is actionable intelligence" he would go after Al Qaida in Pakistan "IF PRESIDENT MUSHARAFF DOES NOT ACT!!!!". Gosh some people are so shallow. Misisnformation is dragging us under. Barack is right and this should have been done 5 years ago. If you had an enemy who had attacked your family and you knew for real where he is hiding, you would not go after him simply because he is in your neighbors backyard? Foolish thinking!!! GO BARACK.

Does Obama not realize that Pakistan is a sovereign nation and that he can't just start fighting 'terrorists' on lands that the United States has not gained permission to do so? Part of embrassing the diplomatic process he says he supports so much is working through the proper channels to take actions like the one's he speaks of. The UN exists for this, as well as the direct dialogues we have with President Musharraf. Here's yet again another example of how little he either understands about the international process, or his willingness to say anything to make people like him.

It is obvious that continued pleas to actually READ what the man said, before making an ignorant and uneducated post continue to go unheeded. SEVERAL of you have posted knee-jerk reactions to a sound-bite headline. Shame on all of you. If you are making your voting decision on this headline and NOT 'all' of what he said in his speech, then I say that your decision was made before you even saw the headline.

Obama wants to attack Pakistan?

No. He wants to strike at "high-value terrorist targets" within Pakistan if President Musharraf fails to act. Read for comprehension, my friend.

"Musn’t we get approval from the U.N. and Congress first?"

To strike "high-value terrorist targets" within Pakistan? Absolutely not.

"Won’t that make the rest of the world hate us?"

The rest of the world will hate us if we capture or kill Osama Bin Laden? Absolutely not. Get real, Righty.

"Won’t that create more terrorists?"

Striking "high-value terrorist targets" within Pakistan will create more terrorists. I doubt it. What's creating more terrorists is being hunkered down in Iraq killing innocent Iraqis over a war that was started over WMD lies. Stop comparing Apples and oranges.

Go Obama! I have been wondering since March 2003 why the heck we invaded Iraq and not Pakistan. Let's go into Pakistan and Afghanistan and end this war once and for all!

You can certainly see why not to vote for Obama with these kind of statements. So this is how he wants to thank one of United States best allies.

Oh yeah real smart. I wonder how Pakistan will respond when we start pouring troops over the border. Tactical nukes anyone???? He won't get my vote in 08'.

Obama just keeps getting worse and worse.

Obama wants to attack Pakistan? What's his exit strategy? Musn't we get approval from the U.N. and Congress first? Won't that make the rest of the world hate us? Won't that create more terrorists? Just insert the other Democratic anti-war talking points here and you'll see what a gift that fool Obama just gave us. He'll never be President.

I am an outsider from pakistan and after fully reading his speech,i believe you guys have the right man to choose as a president, mind you if the pakistani government knows of people that pose a treat to them in the kasmir area of india where the indian government has no control, they wont hesitate to strike them out.thats what i believe he said he will do, and he said he will do it only when the pakistani government fails to act. You have to go to the tribal areas to know that the government has no control of those regions.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/ObamaHQ/CpHR

CNN did not highlight any of the important messages in Obama's speech. Here is a particularly inspiring paragraph:

America is at war with terrorists who killed on our soil. We are not at war with Islam. America is a compassionate nation that wants a better future for all people. The vast majority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims have no use for bin Ladin or his bankrupt ideas. But too often since 9/11, the extremists have defined us, not the other way around.

Read his speech. I believe in Obama and give my FULL support to his campaign for presidency.

Up until now, I wasn't decided about Obama. Now, I really, really do not want him to win the primary. We are already at war in two countries. We do not need to take the war into a third.

This campaign is inside my head!! This is exactly what needs to be done!!

Thanks for listening Senator Obama.

If he is in Pakistan, bin Laden "would not be taken into custody," Major General Shaukat Sultan Khan told ABC News in a telephone interview, "as long as one is being like a peaceful citizen."
– ABC News, Sept. 5, 2006.

pakistan and its rogue nuclear weapons are the menace to whole world. Pakistani goverment is sheltering terrorists and lying to the American public.

Obama will put a stop to this terrorist drama and make them face justice. I have not heard any other candidate state any plan other than Obama.

Obama is the only Senator that I know of that did not vote to go to war in Iraq after 9-11. That took guts. Everyone was gung ho to go to war with Iraq after 9-11. Obama was the only Senator who question why do we need to go in Iraq? One expert on Iraq said that the United States will be in Iraq for at least the next 50 years to try to straighten the mess out we got into. My question is why are we still in Iraq? The Iraqi's don't want us over there. There is a major Civil War going on right now over there and we are caught right in the middle of it. Bin Laden and the majority of al Qaeda are in a different part of the world. Our resources and money should be in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Like Homer Simpson would say "Duh". Obama should be the next President of the United States. No doubt in my mind about that.

Its a little late for invading Pakistan. The US should have done that after 911. Is Mr. Obama living in the wishful world of the past? It is these kinds of comments that shows just how inexperienced he is. He needs a few more years to make the transition to the national speed of things.

Obama is a Genius. Be sure to READ the speech before you post your ignorant negativity. There is a lot more to it than what the headlines say. Your comments are naive. You allow the media to form an opinion for you. Do your research...then make a judgment. Here’s the link for your convenience: http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

God help us if this nit-wit becomes President.

I really appreciate Mr.Obama's comments. Pakistan is the country that historically nourishes Terrorist to wage proxy and bloody war against other nations. Till now the world did not feel the heat of that. Now its high time to cease that and put the Pakis on right path of developing theri nation.

Why would you want to go into Pakistan and destabilize a country who has a minority population of extremists, and the majority is trying to fight them off. Also they are a nuclear state. Is this guy nuts or what??? I am a die heart Democrat but this is just illogical to destabilize an area that is already in a very sensitive position thanks to Mr Bush!! I hope Hillary has more brains than this guy otherwise I will have to give my vote to some independent!

You guys have all gotten it wrong, please people learn to READ and UNDERSTAND issues before you start commenting on them he never said he will invade pakistan, he only said he will attack the terrosist in the region of Pakistan which we all know is not controlled by the Pakistani government if they fail to act. Even if it is politically damaging to Musharraf, we should hit this region of Pakistan if we know where the terrorists are,when the isrealis felt that Sadam hussien's nuclear reactor was a treat to the they went into iraq and destroyed it, if the US a has a very sound intelligene that osama bin laden is in a location in the pakistani tribal areas and the government of pakistan fails to act ,they US will go in and take him and his cohorts out swiftly so that he doesnt pose more treat to the US, thats what barack obama said and i believe any sensible person will believe that too,he made some very strong proposals on how to tackle terrorism and i must confess am really impressed thought he lost my vote but now i can't vote for any body else but him, i was about to make a commet berating him and what he stands for but after i read the full speech i knew i was very wrong lets learn to read before we make assertions.

To Coffey,

I admitted it. however, I did go back and read the speech. I challenge EVERY one of these responders to do the same. I really am VERY disappointed with CNN. I admired Obama before seeing these headlines, and was surprised at how the headlines came off. And then after reading the ENTIRE speech, I was impressed with Obama all over again. He has very clear vision about what the real threat to our country is and how to begin going about the necessary change. Change will be difficult and a long process due to the past six years of this administration and the unnecessary war they got us involved in ( and of course prior administrations have much blame to take into consideration..for one, by training Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets, etc). I was like Obama and never believed in going into a stupid, not thought out war-Iraq. We needed to focus on what the real threat is....imminent threat versus preemptive strike...to me it's the America I believe in. 911 should have been a call to be more informed and eliminate the threat. Instead, we focused on how we could improve our position with oil and lost sight of what was really important.

Most of those who didn't read his speech are probably Clinton and Edwards supporters. Two Senators who didn't read the NIE report before they voted to agree with President Bush in the war with Iraq.

Sound bites and Cliff notes (if you were in college you would get an F) seem to be what some people want instead of reading the information and making an intelligent comment.

Please, read his speech at:
http://www.barackobama.com.

It is important to be informed instead of being ill-informed. I agree with several individuals, CNN is misqouting Senator Obama.

Please, read his speech for yourself!

Naive.

Obama has lost a lot of goodwill in pakistan with this stupid speech amognst moderates. I thought Obama was anti-war and wanted the troops home.
Why not add Yemen /Sudan and Indonesian after your conquest of Pakistan and Afghanistan Mr. Obama.

I think the Obama campaigen knows what there up against thats why he posted his speach for all to read. And I think in the end Obama will also expose the media for what it has been doing to damn near every American in this country. Spin a story for there own personal gain. Its disgusting they missed every single point of his speach and made it seem as though Obama is trying to just pull out of iraq and blow up pakistan...I wonder if they read the speach?

THIS BLOG IS STUPID. No one is willing to admit they only read the headline. We can't do nothing and we can't be pigheaded and rush to war. Then what? Obama talked more about using other methods than an actual war. Can everyone on this blog take the time to read the speech? You might not agree with everything in it but I think we'd all agree the HEADLINE WAS MISLEADING!!!! Man, I'm so sick of this sound bite nation. We were smarter than this.

Till yesterday I had a doubt that Obama could be the next occupant of the Whitehouse.Today he cleared my doubts and I am convinced that he is going to be left out in the race with the display of his "diplomacy".

Well, he's getting the million+ Indian votes for sure!

Some of the comments on this blog border on the insane!

READ THE MAN'S SPEECH and stop acting like 9-11 didn't happen. Osama Bin Laden murdered over 3,000 Americans on American soil. According to our own intelligence reports, his group is stronger than before 9-11. They are going to try and kill us again, what are we suppose to do? Just let them come over here again?

I thank the Lord for Senator Obama and his approach to this very serious situation. Bin Laden is still alive and all of us know he is in Pakistan.

The meaning of insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting a different result. Senator Obama realizes that to catch this murderer we must do things differently!

I don't care about Pakistan's President I care about my American sisters and brothers! I care about MY COUNTRY!

It is a shame to see CNN only using snippets of Obama's and spinning them to make the story more "newsworthy". It's also sad that the most any of the 24-hour news networks aired of the speech was a couple of minutes of introductory remarks; no doubt, though, had this been a steam pipe popping or a news conference about a murdered woman in which no information could be given, we'd see 3 hours of commercial-free coverage.

And to th75% of people posting here who just don't get it: I hope you don't vote or make any major decisions; your lack of basic reading comprehension, reasoning, and critical thinking skills is the biggest challenge this country faces.

CNN at work again...spinning the speech to highlight what the Clinton's want you to hear. What do you bet if hillary had given the same speech they would be talking about how GREAT it was.

Hey I just read the full speech at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/ObamaHQ/CpHR

CNN and the other news outlets did not report the full message he was sending. I truly believe they want to destroy this mans campaign. He had some really good point that I fear will never make the air. The news agencies did not do a good job at reporting what he was truly saying. Seems the "SPIN" really comes from CNN, FOX, AP...need I go on? I wish there was a better way for the candidates to get their messages out with out the scary headlines and biases of the media and political parties.

"Now I know what people meant by saying *thin political resume*. Just having the charisma of delivering a speech does not mean you are ready to take the presidency."

Name a candidate that has experience with dealing with terrorism on a presidential level. Uh.........none of them. The closest you can come is Hillary Clinton, and I doubt she was in the Situation Room while Bill was making executive decisions.

But you know who probably was? Secretary of Defense, head of CIA, Secretary of State, and many other Cabinet leaders. Being a president isn't necessarily about being the most educated (as noted by TWO Bush victories) or the most experienced. It is about being the most capable of surrounding yourself with the most educated and most experienced people to help make informed decisions, and then being able to effectively communicate to the American people and to foreign leaders about the policy decisions. Obama has pleged to do this by saying that he will surround himself with the best and the brightest, regardless of party. That is what I want in a president.

So, to those saying Obama has a "thin resume", I challenge you to find another candidate in the field that has ALL the components of a good president – not just "experience" dealing with terrorism.

obama is an IDIOT neoconservative.

were not attacking Pakistan.. they have nuclear weapons. we dont attack countries with nuclear weapons.

Obama would also 'fight terrorsim' by pre-emptively nuking Iran. this guy is no different than Bush.

Obama how smart you can possible be? May be you need to first resolve Iraq then think about fighting other wars. Stop wasting taxpayers money as you will not get elected with these radical views. This is one things about Democrats that they never have there story straight… get the troops out of Iraq … then send the troops to Pakistan .. WTF …

Read the full text of the speech before commenting:
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

"As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

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.

And Pakistan needs more than F-16s to combat extremism. As the Pakistani government increases investment in secular education to counter radical madrasas, my Administration will increase America's commitment. We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists' program of hate is met with one of hope. And we must not turn a blind eye to elections that are neither free nor fair - our goal is not simply an ally in Pakistan, it is a democratic ally."

Let's all move to Canada

This speech contained so much more than a statement about fighting terrorists in Pakistan. It was a comprehensive, well-reasoned plan for enhancing global security and American's relationship with the world. I urge all of you to read the speech in its entirety. http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

Here's a particularly interesting idea from the speech that doesn't look like it made it into news articles:
"I will also launch a program of public diplomacy that is a coordinated effort across my Administration, not a small group of political officials at the State Department explaining a misguided war. We will open "America Houses" in cities across the Islamic world, with Internet, libraries, English lessons, stories of America's Muslims and the strength they add to our country, and vocational programs. Through a new " America's Voice Corps" we will recruit, train, and send out into the field talented young Americans who can speak with - and listen to - the people who today hear about us only from our enemies."

First, let's see if he is elected President. Second, once in the Oval Office, reality strikes and realizes it's easier said than done.

this contridicts what obama said a month ago. nothing but giberish.

Obama has no idea what he would be getting "US" into. Its ridiculous to declare a war before you have any sort of tangible strategy and worse, before you are even in a position to be doing so.
Ideally, we would be able to go after those harbouring the real "terrorists" but we have to realize that we are already such a defecit that our great grandchildren will have to pay for the bad seeds we will have sown.
Many have stated that it will only escalate distaste and ill-will of the radical Islamic followers. We also forget after so often being shown how much they hate us that many Americans don't realize that there are many out there who do not wish the US harm although they may ridicule us for our pompous actions. Do we really wish to wage a neverending war? We're so close to coming to a conclusion even though it is not without loose ends. We would be waging a Holy War, cleansing the world of "terrorists" just as we view them doing the same to us. Let's just bring closure to this and be done with it.

Hello- My article was posted and the last sentence has "Osama is willing to face it..." It should read "Obama". Could you PLEASE REVISE! Thank you!

The majority of the people posting here either didn't read the article or have HORRIBLE ready comprehension.

Shame on CNN for the sensationalist headline.

The fact is that Obama has a true sense of what it means to be a part of the international field. He recognizes that there are real threats out beyond our borders that can affect those of us here.

Barack Obama is ready to be logical, decisive, and take over the situation that Bush has created in what I believe to be a very logical way. When it comes to foreign policy, Obama is not emotionally driven, which is extremely important.

From what Barack Obama is saying, it can be expected that the only military action this country will take in the future is to deal with a credible threat to this country in a concise way.

Barack Obama is indeed the best candidate for Presidency of this country.

And to those who say that Obama "is done" need to wake up and realize that this so-called "War on Terror" is not going anywhere no matter who is President. I'd like to know who those people are going to vote for and what their plan is for the terrorist threat. What we are deciding in November 2008 is who will best lead us in that "War" and who will best unite the country behind the fact that we have to fight it. Personally, I hope that Obama is that candidate, but good luck to anyone who is unlucky enough to get elected.

Kevin ~ Houston, TX

writes, "ACTING ON SOLID INTELLIGENCE TO KILL BIN LADEN INSIDE PAKISTAN IF MUSHARRAF REFUSES TO DO IT IS NOT INVADING PAKISTAN, MORONS."

Uh..Kevin.. what DO you call using military force in a sovereign country that opposes your intervention??

Talk about moronic – you REALLY think lobing a few missiles after Bin Laden (who likely is already dead) – perhaps killing a number of innocent Pakistanis will be ok with Musharraf and the Pakistani people?

How about we send YOU as the envoy over to Pakistan after the military action and you explain how we didnt "invade" their country. Does that work for you??

I have to admit, I responded without first reading the entire speech. I agree with Kevin in Houston, TX that CNN and other outlets (Drudge,Fox News,etc.) are acting irresponsibly by reducing a 5000-word thesis into one controversial sentence for a headline. I am also so sick of this. This is a perfect example for why our political system is so @#$@%^$ up. All you do is make it as sensational as possible to get attention. If people would read the whole thing, they wouldn’t be posting all this utter nonsense about invading Pakistan. ACTING ON SOLID INTELLIGENCE TO KILL BIN LADEN INSIDE PAKISTAN IF MUSHARRAF REFUSES TO DO IT IS NOT INVADING PAKISTAN, MORONS. There isn’t a patriot in this country he would take issue with this. If Clinton had done it when he had the chance 3000 people would still be alive. Let’s not get another 3000 killed to protect Musharraf, who is in power through a military coup, anyway.

We are way to quick to respond. The media has been very guilty of manipulating words here to get readers. It is such a sad situation, as Obama clearly has what it takes to do what is right for our country. He cares for our country as a whole and not just for personal benefit (as Bush has done). The ignorance that lives in this country voted Bush in twice. We cannot afford for that same ignorance to hop on this bandwagon and not vote for someone who represents good and not evil. All we all want is for everyone to be more informed!!

If you want to see how fast you can incite a global war by Muslims against the west, by all means, invade Pakistan. This is warmongering madness at its absurd height. I would have hoped for better from Obama, clearly I was mistaken.

Well said Obama! You are the first person I saw in the past few years after 09/11 that said the right thing..."getting out of Iraq and on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan". This is what this President should have done right after 9/11 but it is not too late yet.

I am not the citizen on the US but will get my citizenship next year and I will surely vote for you.

I like reading the comments of people who say Obama doesn't know what he is talking about and other comments that came from people who clearly haven't read or heard the speech. I'm sure he just wakes up and decides that he knows things. The fact is that ignorant people have overtaken this country and this blog and until we start to actually read and think about what is going on and stop making heated, partisan arguments based on a spun and well-manufactured CNN or FOX headline, this country is going nowhere but down.

This is one sharp, realistic, in your face with the truth individual. He reviews the facts, goes over every possible solution, and makes a decision base on not just what will help us in the short term, but what will benefit us for the long haul. And in doing so, he not only gains the respect of the people, but respect from other nations as well.

Smart people understand that while war is an ugly thing, sometimes you have to do what you have to do in order to keep even uglier things from occurring. He gets that. People (smart) all over the world get that. That is why other nations like him so much.

I’m a Dem, as well as a Vet, and proud that he is taking a stand on terrorism, and erasing the avoid war at all cost stigma that has been placed on Dems. Not that I am pro war, but some wars have to be fought in order to have peace. Besides, he is not saying he would just go and attack without just cause, nor is he saying he would not give our so-called alley the opportunity to do the right thing; but what he is saying, is that if they don’t do the right thing, then prepare for some red, white, and blue up the Waazoo.

It’s a great feeling to know that he’ll be a president that will not always say or do the most popular thing or that with the least resistance; but the right thing…the things that will make us a better nation, a fairer nation, a nation that is once again viewed as the greatest in the world.

Obama for President,

You got my vote.

As a die-hard Republican, I've been listening carefully to the Democrats, because Guiliani is the only Republican that peaks my interest. Finally, Mr. Obama has said something of substance, something that resembles a thought-out plan, not the usual save-the-world generalities. I agree and would support the refocus the war on terror to Pakistan and Afganistan. Nicely done, Mr. Obama !!

Finally. Someone willing to do what should have happened after 9/11. Osama bin Laden started this war on the American people- and fled to Pakistan. That was side-stepped by the Bush administration. An "ally" does not harbor your enemies- let's wake up to that. Bush has wasted billions of dollars and American lives fighting his fathers war in Iraq and has yet to provide true safety and diplomacy as our president. Osama is willing to face it and take on our current administrations errors. He has my support and my vote.

And by the way which Intelligence is every one talking about? The same intelligence which our great secretary of state brandished in front of the UN when we were going into Irag. Weapons of Mass destruction any one?

So now all of those who support action against Pakistan are calling up intelligence from the same group of agencies as a reason to go to Pakistan.

Mr. Obama knows it would not be wise to attack a country of 160 million with nuclear warheads and 600K plus army, who is he kidding we have no more troops to send anywhere else.

He is just doing this to gain politcal mileage. The problem is that although he is getting political mileage here in the US as I can tell by the comments which are being posted, on the other hand he is sending a very bad message to the people of pakistan. Guess what we want you to help us but if you dont we will come after you.

And that to because of the same intelligence we had when we went into Iraq.

Oh yes the world will support us this time, weapons of mass destruction remember that.

It would be wise to remember an old saying

"To Kill a mosquito you dont need an elephant"

Go after Osama by all means do it through good intelligence and law enforcement.

Remember all the major Al-qaida activist that have been caught have been through the help of pakistan government. Loose that support then get ready for opening the pandoras box.

And there is nothing naive about that!

let me get this straight; the 9/11 hijackers were saudi and bush just gave billions to them for more arms. is that right?!?! pakistan is not the problem; what happened to the "cia and fbi"!?!? weren't they supposed to be after this guy. why the heck haven't they found him yet. and further more, how many more countries are we going to tick off before we realize the incredible harm we have done on our reputation. wake up usa! killing more people is not going to save us. trust me.

These remarks will haunt Senator Obama, during his campaign and during his presidency if he is elected. Stirking inside Pakistan's territory would only create more religious extremists. Musharaff need encouragement and help to eliminate such extremist, not threatened. No one have and no one will win a war in tribal Pakistan. Read History.

Bob Hart ~ San Jose writes,
Common sense 101

Obama’s strategy
Hit the place where terrorists live – Pakistan

Bush’s strategy
Hit an innocent place and create new terrorists – Iraq

Finally we have one presidential candidate who sees the light
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

"Innocent" – is that the term you libs are now calling Saddam? You MIGHT want to come out of your self-induced haze and recall WHY we removed Saddam (UN Resolution 1441 passing unanimously after 10 years and 10 previous UN Resolutions calling for Saddam to comply with inspections and dearming). Bush NEVER said Saddam was involved with 9/11.

Hit Pakistan? So you're proposing we invade a country with proven nuclear weaponry?

The only light I can see is a huge mushroom cloud engulfing our ground troops in Pakistan. Obama needs to stick to the Oprah show and stay out of foreign policy!

This guy is done. Sorry Senator Obama, you can always go on Oprah.

I wonder who Hillary is going to pick as her running mate???

I could not believe the nonsense I am reading on this board.

Attak Pakistan ? Are you out of your mind?

Let me tell you war-mongers one thing – every Pakistani will pick up arms to fight the US army. And we have one of the best army and air force in the whole world. Not to mention , our friend China will also keep its promise to defend us.

And finally, the Pakistani govt is well justified in nuking US forces if they are foolish enough to do this.

Dont be under any illusion. We are not Iraq. We have defeated superpower before ( Soviet Union ). If Allah wants us to defeat the other superpower, we will do it just as easily.

CNN and other outlets (Drudge,Fox News,etc.) are acting irresponsibly by reducing a 5000-word thesis into one controversial sentence for a headline. I am so sick of this. This is a perfect example for why our political system is so @#$@%^$ up. All you do is make it as sensational as possible to get attention. If people would read the whole thing, they wouldn't be posting all this utter nonsense about invading Pakistan. ACTING ON SOLID INTELLIGENCE TO KILL BIN LADEN INSIDE PAKISTAN IF MUSHARRAF REFUSES TO DO IT IS NOT INVADING PAKISTAN, MORONS. There isn't a patriot in this country he would take issue with this. If Clinton had done it when he had the chance 3000 people would still be alive. Let's not get another 3000 killed to protect Musharraf, who is in power through a military coup, anyway.

“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.”

This is a critical bit of nuance. He's not advocating establishing a presence in Pakistan as we have in Iraq, he's talking about discrete military strikes. Huge difference, especially when you're talking about a region that isn't even really controlled by the government in Pakistan.

"So the Democrat’s answer to ending the War in Iraq is attacking Pakistan?"

No. Read for comprehension.

Now I know what people meant by saying *thin political resume*. Just having the charisma of delivering a speech does not mean you are ready to take the presidency.

Obama needs to dedicate his efforts towards developing sustainable peace, rather than involving america in another quagmire.

you know, lateley this guy is looking very wrong.

Too many people are feeling that there is something fishy with Pakistan being an "ally".

Two excuses that people ( prolly Pakistanis ) on this board are saying -

1. Dont attack Pakistan, they have a very strong army.
psst...if their army is that strong, why can't they control the terrorists ?

2. Dont attack Pakistan, terrorists will overthrow the govt.
duhh...if the govt is that weak, US should move in immediately to put down the terrorists!!

Something doesn't add up here. The American people want an end to terrorism.
Obama has the guts to say what the majority of American people are saying. For that reason alone, he should be president.

So the Democrat's answer to ending the War in Iraq is attacking Pakistan?

Yep, it is clear that most people posting about Obama starting a war in Pakistan did not actually understand what he was saying.

Iraq is not the right place to be fighting the terrorists. The war was to remove Saddam from power and establish a government that would want to sell oil to its liberators, thus, securing a stable oil supply. That is a useful goal. Unfortunately, it isn't working out as well as we would like. We want to help establish democracy in Iraq but, unfortunately, this will take several more years. If we pull out now, we don't secure our objective of stable oil supply.

Obama is saying we need to work with our Afgani and Pakistani allies to fight the terrorists where they are strongest. They will need military assistance for this. We would pursue this with the ASSISTANCE OF AFGANISTAN AND PAKISTAN. In fact, putting the terrorists on defensive is so important, we should be willing to strike terrorist locations, even if it is politically difficult for our Pakistan ally. The region of Pakistan with terrorists is not controlled by the Pakistani government. Even if it is politically damaging to Musharraf, we should hit this region of Pakistan if we know where the terrorists are.

Do we have the military prowess to carry out our mission in both Iraq and Afganistan/Pakistan? That is the question. Obama thinks we can and should reduce our military effort in Iraq to cover the needs in Afganistan/Pakistan.

Obama gives a reasonable straightforward opinion. You can agree or disagree, but it is certainly not naive. Unless we start getting more volunteers for military service, we have to make a choice. 1) move troops from Iraq to Afganistan 2) just bring them home and lose the access to oil or 3) just leave things as they are and hope (pray?) for the best.

I was always a big supporter of Senator Obama but not ANYMORE. He is yet another WAR monger. I did not know Obama was such an IDIOT. Pakistan is an ally and a nuclear state. Tell him to go visit the northern terrains of Pakistan. Iraq and Afghanistan would look an easy task then.
What happened to the idea of winning the hearts and minds of the people of the region through economical and social developments?

GO Dennis Kucinich for 2008!!!

It's so interesting how a lot of you just type comments over one small part of the speech.

READ THE ENTIRE SPEECH! CNN and MSM only take one small part OUT OF THE BIG PICTURE.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

I dare you READ..IT...FIRST!! THE ENTIRE THING...NOT JUST A SNIP. Then post your comment.

Then, tell me if you still think Obama is NAIVE. He's the only one who has the whole vision.

Don't be like Hillary who voted for the war without reading the NIE. Don't just put your two cents in about Obama's foreign policy, without reading the entire speeach. Do your homework!!!

There are real terrorists murdering "real" innocent people in pakistan. In Kashmir islamic fundementalists ran over 3 million Pundits (Hindus) out of Kashmir because they were not "believers". This was back in 98'. To this day the Pundits still live in holes in the ground and the terrorists murder them for sport. It is the real frontline of terrorism. Ofcourse Bush befriends the muslims. Terrorism in Pakistan is due to America doing "business" with Muslims in Kashmir. Hindus are a non-violent people of various sects, who all preach gentleness and peacefulness. They only believe in fighting as a last resort. Thier women and children have been getting slaughtered by these "muslims" for millenia. If you stupid people can't see the truth, it's because you don't want to. You don't feel it necessary to help people who are not "christians". Trust me you will not get into heaven that way.
You don't care and you're just looking for a reason to do without a black president. Why not just choose the obvious reason? Black Americans don't need to be running the world. They have too many issues and hate every other race on earth for it. Put them into play and they'll be worse terrorists than Bush...sorry.

Common sense 101

Obama's strategy
Hit the place where terrorists live – Pakistan

Bush's strategy
Hit an innocent place and create new terrorists – Iraq

Finally we have one presidential candidate who sees the light

While I understand that he did not say he will not attack the government or the general citizens of Pakistan, he really doesn't understand the complexity of the situation. The result of Iraq can not be used as a predictor of how Pakistan will result. I am sure about one thing, that every citizen of Pakistan will become a troop. One thing that makes a country angrier and more hostile than anything is to have foreign troops on its soil. Every citizen will join together on this. They are not afraid. Let's be honest, if a country does not like what's going on here and invades OUR soil, what do you think we're going to do? Sit like lame ducks? It's a normal response. How could we expect that? More radicalism WILL be created. I am not sure why the U.S. has to mess with an ally and not be more patient. Perhaps this plan was already in the works, and perhaps this is why the U.S. is working out some 'special' arms deals with India. Our governement unfortunately is not honest about its intentions or its actual plans.

Obama is not talking about invading Pakistan, but strenthening the international forces already there, and creating a comprehensive political and economic strategy against terrorism. About time! That should have been done 5 years ago. It would have saved us thousands of American and Iraqi lives and billions of dollars. Those who call this naive, are naive.

I think Obama is absolutely right Pakistan might as well be harboring Osama Bin Ladin because they certainly are doing nothing to kill or capture him.

You people who are against Obama don't get it. He is trying to change for the good the way this country is run politically, he is engaging the youth of this country and they are beginning to participate in the process. Both parties seem to forget that we the people can remove them from office in November 2008. For the Black person (Tutu Borås )that said this country is not ready for a Black president, you need to consider staying in sweden. Candidates say things they regret later except for Bush, he stands by every word he says. When Obama becomes president I hope he surrounds himself with people who are honest and not afraid to disagree with him. Not unlike the present administration we have now, totally incompetent! It's time to give the DEMS the power to correct the injustices...tax cuts for the rich, conservative Supreme Court Judges and any other idiotic law are idea that Bush/Cheney/Roe have concocted for the last 7 years. For those of you who continue to blame Clinton, please, please get a life, the IRAQ war is BUSH's mess and always will be his war, that's his legacy!!!

Bob, New York, NY/Mr. Coffey, Raleigh, NC,

I believe both Obama and Clinton stated they would only support more nuclear power if the matter of disposing the waste and cost could be much better managed.

I agree with this stance on nuclear and think we should aggressively pursue other renewable and alternative energies that have been on the brink of acceptability for quite a long time. Of these, I don't think corn ethanol be included as its usage hurts the food supply and it looks to be that switch grass maybe be the best overall ethanol solution.

Go Obama! Put the focus back where it belongs. Finally someone that makes sense. You go after the people who committed the crime. Obama in 08!

"Obama DID NOT say attack the government of Pakistan. He said attack the terrorist within the borders of Pakistan. It doesn’t matter what he said, we are only going to read the HEADLINE. I’m worried for us…we are sooooo lazy to read.”

Yeah – I have no doubt Pakistan Government will receive our troops with open arms! Wait... if I remember correctly when Bush was negotiating with Pakistan the deal was we would not enter their country but they would run raids on the borders in support of our efforts.

Granted Pakistan has rougue elements within the military... but exactly is Obama going to convince the Pakistani people to allow our soldiers on their soil with arms and the likely event of "collateral damage"???

NAIVE!!

If your read this speech and say that he is naive and you are a registered voter you should unregister immediately because you are too ignorant to be deciding the fate of our nation
Read the entire thing, hes right and his willing to actually say what he means.

That's rich...another President that never fought in a war, waging war?

Obama is just saying what people want to hear without thinking of any consequences. That is exactly what we need, another cow boy, just black this time in the White house ! I dotn think Obama has has idea what he is talking about. He is just concerned about getting votes by saying what the people want to hear ! Go vote for him and start another war, fund it with your tax payers money while the trade deficit increases and our jobs move to China and India so in 10 or 20 years we become a poor uneducated country where there is no work. Maybe than the terrorist will stop coming after us !! Or wait.. maybe we can mind our own business instead of meddling in affairs of countries around the world .. Nah .. that would be too much to ask from a nation of Cowboys !

THIS IS WHAT WE NEED AND AFTER HEARING THIS HE HAS MY VOTE!!!

Aamir,

The failures in Iraq are those of the Iraqi people who have FAILED to take advantage of the opportunity to construct a democratic society in which all Iraqis have a voice.

If you remember correctly, the Americans went into Iraq and rolled over the Hussein government in the time it takes to get a Big Mac.

If the effort to provide a safe and free Iraq fails, it will not be the Americans who are falling prey to a bloody power struggle on the streets of Iraqi cities, it will be the Iraqis.

How many of you read the entire text of the speech before posting a comment?

Obama is not naive he is very shrewd as a matter of fact; war mongering has won a lot of elections and that is exactly what Obama is trying to capitalize on, its the American nation which is naive and may fall for this tactic yet again.

This bandaid approach of leaving one war and redeploying to another has been tried and tested and has always failed.

"Killing Bin Laden at this point would be worthless. It would only increase his number of followers."

Are you afraid to kill Osama Bin Laden?

Who pays for 9/11? Iraqis?

Don't you just kow that Hillary's fangs are out right now!

Bet her people are sitting there trying to calm her down from her manic rage.

She will most definitely attack this idea!

"Sorry Mr Obama but if you really want to take on terrorism you go after Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. You decrease their source of revenue to fund terrorism by taking advantage of the US national resources instead of driving up the price of oil by importing oil and gasoline to the US. You build nuclear reactors and increase the supply of electricity which can be used to power battery powered cars." Bob, New York, NY

In the debate Obama said he would support advanced nuclear power technology and Clinton said maybe yes maybe no (as usual). For a guy without substance, he is starting to string together a comprehensive strategy for america. As for Clinton, Iraq (no answer), Healthcare (no plan...again), Energy Policy (no answer). When someone make a speach people...READ IT. Not part of it.

Obama will flee Iraq and invade Pakistan? This fool is no different from George W Bush. It would be more advisable for Americans to learn from their military failures in Iraq.

Should Obama hit the US considering it was the US that created the Taliban and funded Pakistan to train the Taliban to fight the Soviets? Stupid people. Waging wars does not help. Violence brews violence. Waging these wars against muslim countries under the pretext of waging war on terrorism is working towards spreading exactly what its seeking to destroy. The supposed terrorists on those planes were saudis, not pakistanis. some of them were even found alive later on. which kinda makes the facts a bit doubtful. read the facts and news around 9/11 before supporting a decision involving a lot more innocent lives than the 3000 taken on 9/11. attacking pakistan would be the dumbest thing to do. attacking any more muslim country would be. a message to all these people supporting another war: make an informed decision when ur saying u support another way coz otherwise the blood of a lot more innocent people would be on your hands too

Mr. Sean, could u explain "Illegal Nukes"? Whatever nukes other countries have are legal? Are our nukes legal? Get real and think outside the box.

Obama isn't the only naive person in this country, who simply thinks terrorism is to be stamped out by killing a few terrorists here and there.

Terrorism is like WWII kamikazes. You don't fight kamikazes, you fight Imperialist Japan. We're not in this battle to kill terrorists, but to stop facsist Islamists. Those radical Muslims work their nefarious deeds across the whole Middle East, in Saudi Arabie, Yemen, Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, you name.

There is not one 'right' country to go after, people! You have to start somewhere and change the whole region.

Iran is now sandwiched between Iraq and Afghanistan (US forces). Syria is cuaght between Iraq and Isreal (US and allied forces). Democracy and a chance at leading a productive life will keep people from being suicide bombers.

The Middle East is a demographic time bomb. Over 30% of the population is younger than 25 years old. These people have no jobs and little prospects of earning a steady income in backward economies. The Islamic revolution in Iran has done nothing in 30 years and the young generation is pro-West. The want change, too.

Iraqis are voting. Afhanis are voting. Women in Saudi Arabia are now voting and can hold local political offices. Syria is out of Lebanon. Libya is giving up its WMDs and wants to join the world again (slowly). Egypt is showing some signs of granting more political reforms. Things are changing. But it takes more than 5 years!

It took the UNITED STATEs of AMERICA some 10 years to come up with our Constitution, and during that time had to deal with insurrections, as well. Yes, in our own country. The US was fighting in Germany for 5 years and then occupied that land for another 10 years, too.

Too many people want quick fixes and immediate gratification. Get real. Do we just live with hijackers flying planes into buildings? Or shooting down passenger jets with missles? Or blowing up subway trains? Destroying buildings with hundreds of casualties?
Ripping people to shreds with explosives in markets, discos, and churches? Do we live with terrorists killing Olympic athletes and thousands of other innocent victims?

This problem doesn't go away if we close our eyes, turn our backs, or expect little or no sacrifice. Some things are worth taking a stand for. Islamic radicals won't stop fighting just because we do.

Obama, like all the rest in Washington, don't get it. This is not a war that can be fought with troops. This is a war of ideas. Killing Bin Laden at this point would be worthless. It would only increase his number of followers. Unfortunatly due to all the bungling of this administration the only stradegy that will work at this point is to protect the homeland at the ports and borders. Get out of the middle east. Start a 10 year project to find and develop new froms of energy besides oil and wait 3 generation for this to pass.

Bob, New York, NY....

I agree with you totally and what you say Obama supports as well. I support many "climate change/global warming" policies myself as they achieve a great deal in helping the "war on terror". Whether you agree with the science or not is one thing, but whatever we can do to not rely on middle eastern oil, we'll be better for it in the long run.

Mr. Coffey, Raleigh, NC...glad to see there is some reason in our neck of the woods.

The END NEVER justifies the means. Whereas Obama's intentions may be worthy, the manner in which he is suggesting we go about it, is downright ludicrous. Entering another country without that country's permission and consent is invasion. Invading another country and causing countless civilian casualties is only going to reenforce most of the world's view of the U.S. being egocentric, arrogant and irresponsible.

The proposition is as outrageous as allowing the Iraqi army to invade Washington D.C. because the U.S. cannot get their act together in Iraq.

If every country in the world had this vigilante approach and took matters into their own hands, there would be mayhem in the world.

Some of you people really are blind. Read what he actually said, not just the headline!

"five elements: getting out of Iraq and on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world’s most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.”

Only one of those five actually talked about Pakistan and Afghanistan. Its the physical war part. Thats why its called a WAR ON TERROR. If there's going to be fighting, why not fight the right people?

Keep in mind there are four other things he talks about that are incredibly important that this administration never even THOUGHT of doing. This is why he should be President.

Another Bush for president. Only the color of the face is different. Another warmonger and corrupt already politician.
Down with him!
Pete

I would hate to say this, but in this case, Obama is not right. Pakistan has been a helpful ally in this war on terror. Admittedly they still harbor some terrorists, but you have to look at the implications fo violating Pakistani Soverignty or, unsettling President Musharraf. India and Pakistan are the closest they have been to peace since Pakistan's inception.

We cannot go galavanting around unsettling leaders when we do not have a viable option. Democracy in Pakistan and in the Middle East is not tenible in the short run. There is a history of strong man leaders holding their countries together since these countries recieved independence.

While I understand what Obama is suggesting, and I know he is trying to get tough on terror, threatening to take military action in Pakistan is not the right option.

"“Obama DID NOT say attack the government of Pakistan. He said attack the terrorist within the borders of Pakistan. It doesn’t matter what he said, we are only going to read the HEADLINE. I’m worried for us…we are sooooo lazy to read.”

Thank you.
""

Yeah great idea, I'm sure on the flip side the US wouldn't mind foriegn troops running operations on our soil as long as they didn't attack the Government.

Sorry Mr Obama but if you really want to take on terrorism you go after Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. You decrease their source of revenue to fund terrorism by taking advantage of the US national resources instead of driving up the price of oil by importing oil and gasoline to the US. You build nuclear reactors and increase the supply of electricity which can be used to power battery powered cars.

The current environmental policy of the US directly funds terrorism.

Oh and Mr Obama, before you volunteer to be president you may want to re-read the Consititution. Seeing as how the leadership of this nation is to act for the good of the American people first and foremost. Not sit back and worry if were going to offend this nation or that nation because they don't like our policies

(Videotape, January 23, 2007)

MR. KEITH OLBERMANN: Would you reach out immediately to the Syrians and the Iranians, even with the tensions between this country and Iran?

SEN. CLINTON: Absolutely. I don’t see it as a sign of weakness, I see it as a sign of strength. You know, our president will not talk to people he considers bad. Well, there are a lot of bad actors in the world, and you don’t make peace with your friends. You’ve got to deal with your enemies, your opponents, people whose interests diverge from yours.

(End videotape)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20024553/page/2/

Thanks you my future President. The world need a US President with a brain. I can't wait to call you my President. THANK YOU

I'm with Obama! After Pakistan we can occupy London. We can finally fairly tax the poor and finance this.

I agree with the need to take it to Pakistan and Afghanistan instead of or more so than Iraq but have believed all along that the "war on terror" should be fought in a covert manner using global, national and local law enforement.

"Obama DID NOT say attack the government of Pakistan. He said attack the terrorist within the borders of Pakistan. It doesn’t matter what he said, we are only going to read the HEADLINE. I’m worried for us…we are sooooo lazy to read."

Thank you.

the dirty secret of the "war on terror" is Pakistan!

Here is a country that trains all the terrorists in the world, and likely is hiding Bin Laden. not only that, the whole army is radicalised and it has rogue scientists selling nukes on the black market.

A terrorist Islamic nation possessing illegal nukes ! and this is an "ally" in the war on terror ?

Obama knows the score – we need a new guy like him to step up and make America great again – my vote's for Barak

There's really nothing to dislike about Obama, but the more he discusses foreign policy the more he shows himself to be a political lightweight. I am NO Hillary Clinton fan, but she "smoked him" in the debate when he said unequivocally he would meet with foreign leaders considered rogues within his first year of the Presidency. Every time he discussed foreign policy he digs his hole deeper. He's probably future President, but he is no way, shape, or form ready to assume the mantle of that office at this point or at anytime in the next few years.

Obama and his advisers understand where the real enemies are. They are not in Iraq. They are in the mountainous regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan plotting more attacks and I'm glad to see that Barack Obama understands this. We (people opposed to this war in Iraq) complain everyday that Bush has our troops bogged down in Iraq while Osama Bin laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri continue to avoid death and capture. Why would you be opposed to going into Pakistan to go get them?

Barack Obama is right.... "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets, and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”

What are y'all afraid of? You do want Osama Bin Laden captured or killed, right? We all know Bush and the Neo-Cons failed at bringing the real ones who attacked on us 9/11 to justice. They failed. If Barack Obama's plan won't work, can somebody on this blog put a plan on the table that will?

Thanks for the real talk, Barack!

ITS FUNNY THAT PEOPLE THINK PAKISTAN IS OUR ALLY CONSIDERING THAT IS WHERE MOST OF THE TERRORISTS ARE ACTUALLY BEING TRAINED.

ALSO DONT CONFUSE THE WAR ON TERROR WITH THE TERRORIST WAR ON IRAQ WE OURSELVES ARE RUNNING. IRAQ HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM.

WE SHOULD BE WORRIED THAT THE GOVT IS SELLING 20 BILLION IN WEAPONS TO SAUDI ARABIA, BIRTHPLACE OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AND OTHER TERRORIST HIGH COMMANDS. GOOD PLAN GEORGIE.

We are fighting Iraqis in Iraq, not terrorists, they are fundamentalist muslims that are reacting to unjustified occupation and chaos.

And SERIOUSLY PEOPLE, QUIT BEING SO IGNORANT AND BASING IMPORTANT DECESIONS ON YOUR ONE INTERPRETATION OF ONE ARTICLE THAT YOU DIDNT EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO FULLY READ AND UNDERSTAND.. Ignorance will be our great downfall.

You want to call him naive? He is only saying he will do what Bush promised six years ago. Fight terror where it lives. Good to hear a Dem expand on what "pull out" of Iraq really means.

People, please re-read the article and think about it for a second. Just because Obama is saying we need to move the fight to Pakistan/Afghanistan does NOT necessarily mean TROOP engagement. I think people don't realize there are other ways to fight this war than to engage troops, and Obama sees that. He also realizes where the real problems are, and he is bold enough to come out and say "I have and plan, and this is what I am going to do. Don't turn your back on the best bet this country has based on an article. The common reason people won't support Obama is b/c they don't listen to what he is really saying.

Its our job as voters to be smart enough to tell the difference between someone who is Naive, and someone with real ideas as well as a sense of purpose and direction.

Pakistan has been the central source of terrorism. Read any terrorist incident in the world and inevitably you see "..had visited Pakistan to receive training"

The simple question is, why isn't the US pressuring Musharak to act ? It needs a new approach. Maybe Musharak would feel more co-operative after a 3 day aerial bombing of Pakistan's terrorist areas

Obama is on the right track

I think you guys should read his full speach CNN only spun his speach to get the reaction that he's "naive" it so funny how the media works when you readh his speach he will make you feel proud to be an american and ashamed at what bush has put us through.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

This was a great speach he is a wonderful speaker and he is getting over looked

Raj of Seattle WA, your response is the most honest that I've ever heard from a self proclaimed Republican. You are just as brave as Obama.

Let me get this straight. If a group of terrorist attacked us and hid in say...Mexico, and the Mexican gov't refused capture them, we would give then a free pass? I understand now. We only respond to attackers if they hide in a country we don't like. We'll just wait for them to kindly move to a nation we'd like to attack or just surrender. Please don't let the next attackers hide in Eygpt, Jordan, India, Saudi Arabia or any of our friendly African nations.

Obama DID NOT say attack the government of Pakistan. He said attack the terrorist within the borders of Pakistan. It doesn't matter what he said, we are only going to read the HEADLINE. I'm worried for us...we are sooooo lazy to read.

Gutless COWARDS are the people whom changed their view of Obama for saying he will try to find the people responsible for 9-11. Are you people so dumb to realize that this war in Iraq is a disaster designed to help bush and his cronies to make billions of dollars off the death of american lives. what the hell. aparently you people dont care that osama bin laden still is living in pakistan and planning on killing more americans. unlike the iraqis who were content to be shmoes. if we would have gone the tough route, the righteous route from the beginning, we could already have bin laden by now. THIS COUNTRY IS GOING TO HELL, unbelivable selfishness and ignorance will be the downfall of america. This is a bright person, far brighter than any of us. just listen to the man talk for a while, instead of being all "oh i lost all respect cause he said he wanted to find bin laden."

God how stupid are the people of this nation?

“When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan"

Um, that word, WAR is appropriate for the subject at hand-yet is it possible that his idea of fighting a war is through relationships with the characters of interest?

I hope so. War doesn't decide who is right, it only decides who is left. I wish the madness would stop and I wish for America to grow strong within its own America, again.

We are becoming weak; to say that America is great is only to say it! WHERE IS IT! The world is creeping up and they are curious and our special characters of interest are sitting and waiting and if OUR leaders keep it up we will be a broke joke and under someone else's rule-whether is be economically or we actually start speaking Chinese-

All great Empire's fall, look at history and look at how and why it happened. Get Real America, and do it fast.

I have always been a republican and will hopefully be one for the rest of my life. I have been saying all along that the root cause of the terror is Pakistan. They're the ones who created taliban in the first place so how can we expect them to destroy it. Afghanistan is their playground and they are playing with us and acting to support the "War on terror" when as a matter of fact they are using us for money. Osama's in Pakistan along with all his henchman. If i were the president, i would take troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and go on an offensive against Pakistan. Besides, we can always get India to help us and that way we won't use out troops that much. Hopefully a republican candidate says the same thing otherwise i might, again i MIGHT just consider voting for obama.

He won't get my vote. By spreading its modern day colonial regime and seeking to democratize other nations under the guise of fighting terrorism the U.S. is wrapped in a web of karma...you reap what you sew. Bring the troops home and then send them to Pakistan? Doesn't make much logical sense to me. Seems he wants to continue to make the U.S. the most hated country, the largest violator of human rights atrocities by forging ahead with yet another war. The U.S. doesn't want it with the Middle East. I say no to Obama in '08!!!

Everyone just needs to wait for his delivery.

Right, let's continue to work with our "allies" who continue to do nothing about the terrorists training inside their borders. As long as we call them "allies" they can do whatever they want. Hey, while we are at it, lets sell $20 billion in arms to Saudi Arabia! I think I remember that the majority of the terrorists on 9/11 were Saudis, and the majority of the foreign terrorists in Iraq are Saudis, but they are our "allies"!! Oh, and I think Kind Abdullah and Bush have a pretty good financial relationship, too. But as long as they continue to help us win the "War on an abstract idea that has existed for over 4,000 years" then lets keep our hands off.

I think this is really a strong speech, and correct me if I'm wrong, the first comprehensive plan on terrorism by a Democratic candidate...that's a big deal considering it is the most critical issue of the day. I think it's bold to call a spade a spade: If Mushariff won't get OBL, then the next American president, regardless of who they are, must be committed to doing so.

Yeah, Pakistan is our ally as long as Musharraf's shaky regime holds power. Just wait until he's overthrown.

I am black man but i strongly believe that America is not yet ready for a black presidents, judging by the recents uterance of Obama.
He claimed that he would engage Castro, Iran, Syria etc in the first year.
he wants to pull the solders out of Iraq.
Now he wants to go inside Pakistan.
If shows he lacks experience and does not understand what he is talking about. America should watch out for him

President Barack Obama!! God, I pray that we can say that one day soon! This man is by FAR the most intelligent and qualified person running for office on either side. The perfect ticket would be either Obama running with Edwards or Biden as his VP. Anyone who has studied the Middle East would know that Obama's plan is right on the money! My full support of time and money is going toward his campaign.

Everybody keep saying Osama is in Pakistan without any solid evidence. Its just opening fire in the dark, thinking you are killing all the enemies. And what if we don't find him in Pakistan, whats next? India? I mean come on. This way we'll make more enemies. Sending troops all over the world is not the solution.

When i look at the comments from the many Obama haters, I question there strategy on fighting Al queda. We should pull out of Iraq and just sit here and let Al Quieda increase even more? Come on stop trying to be so political and call Obama names for trying to keep america safe. Your screaming bloody murder for a man who is taking the fight to the people who killed 3,000 people? Politics are thrown out the window when inocent people continue to die from exremist. We should say we cant do,wont do and not even try to keep this country safe by going after al quieda? yeah whats your bright ideas for keeping us safe?

I'm not sure who is more naive, Obama or the people posting here. Pakistan is our ally not our enemy. U.S. troops are already in Pakistan fighting along side Pakistani troops.

I agree with Obama that the war on terror should be fought in Afghanistan but to say he would invade an allied nation if the president of that nation did not do his bidding makes Obama out to be an idiot.

We work WITH our allies, not against them, especially when they have nukes of their own.

Obama's inexperience shines through brighter and brighter each day.

If Bill the Pakistan geography expert from San Francisco can travel through Pakistan, then I think our troop can probably do it. No one claims that it would be an easy war – I don't believe there ever has been one. But I think it is better to try to go after them rather than to let them burgeon back to their pre-9/11 strength. Oops, we already did that by wasting 5 years in Iraq.

Naivity is an easy word to throw out. If you follow what has really been going on with 911 and events since then, Pakistan and Afghanistan are where the real terror threats are coming from. Naivity is listening to what the president has been saying and just going with it. It's so obvious now that he put us at war with Iraq without any threat to the US being there. Why? Look up a pre 911 policy called Project for a New American Century. Iraq was never an issue before the war. It was easy for the president to gain trust and illicit action due to fear that resulted from 911. There were no Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq at the time. There are few there now. Iraq is really the result of a Civil war between three major groups fighting for control. Our American soldiers are at risk in Iraq mostly due to the chaos from a civil war, but now that it is such a weak country Al Qaeda has much easier access to them as well. Pakistan is where Bin Laden is hiding. If we did further research into the 911 funding, it has been found that Pakistan had a hand in 911, more than Iraq ever did. Although I agree with what Obama is saying, I doubt he will gain support for another war due to Bush putting us in an unnecessary war in Iraq, and taking the focus and finances away from where we needed to be to eliminate the threat we face due to Al Qaeda and Bin Ladin.

It seems people are seriously misinformed and Obama is taking advantage of that. Pakistan is no Iraq or Afghanistan. It has world's one of best airforce and army. This is just cheap talk to get elected. Bash Pakistan, bash Saudi Arabia etc, because people have strong sentiments against them. But once elected he would be going their to have sound relationship. Democrats make me sick.

Send troops to Pakistan!!! 12 nuclear heads are sitting waiting. Doesnt make sense to go there as, again, we have a faulty intelligence and what we have done in Afghanistan and Iraq, we will do that same there too. "Finally someone has guts to go after Pakistan and Musharraf!, well, we all are fed by highly edited and biased news. "Pakistan is a safe harbor for terrorists", its funny that the people everyone calls terrorists were once trained by the CIA to fight the Russians and now for some reason they defected and stood against US and its policies. Having a typical pattern, US abandoned the clean_up in afghanistan after the war ended and hence this whole Taliban regime's existence. Think about it. If Musharraf was supporting the terrorists then he would he be a victim of three assasination attempts?

Although I am a staunch Republican, I'm enlightened my Sen. Obama's words- however, I feel the need to correct his statement re: the missed opportunity for having failed to act on the actionable intelligence during the 2005 al Queda leadership meeting. His statement implies that Bush administration was the only administration that failed to act on actionable intelligence. Let us not forget the "numerous" opportunities that presented themselves during the Clnton administation. These opportunities were not acted upon either due to the potential political ramifications.
A word to Sen. Obama- you will only win the hearts and minds of the people if you do not become part of the Washington Establishment. You have the opportunity to do great things to win the election- I firmly believe the country is not prepared for another 4 years of "Clintonism"- so take the golden ring that's being presented to you.

What a hypocrite, he is so 'anti-war' but he wants to send our troops to fight in other muslim countries, what will the difference be? Pakistan is our ally, and the president there has a fine balancing act in being our ally but not alienating his own people, he is doing the best he can to keep that balance. Having him be assasinated or taken over by an extremist govt is a bad nightmare. Obama is 'naive and irresponsible'

Obama has showed his leadership again and again. By the way, for people who said or thought that Obama plans to invade Pakistan, please read his transcript. Our coutry would be stronger if we, as citizens, read and listen carefully before responding to or commenting on what others write or say.

Those of you who are calling Obama naive don't get it. Obama clearly says "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and Musharraf WON'T ACT, we will."

Obama is not talking about going blindly into Pakistan, he is talking about acting on solid intel and only if Musharraf doesn't do anything about it. It's quite simple.

Yes that would be very smart destabilize a nuclear nation, and convert the over 70% moderates in that country who have never voted for any Islamic party every into fanatics almost immediately.

Very smart Mr Obama. Kudos for your far reaching strategic thinking.

Maybe instead of talking about what to do next, you might want to talk about how do you get out of the quagmire Iraq where thousands of US soldiers have died in vain.

As far as Osama and his evil comarades are concerned the best way to get them is to win the hearts and minds of the people around whose area they are surviving, this would have to be economically and through political manouvering.

Dont give the mosquitos another chance to breed.

I don't understand how this is any better than the current situation we are in. We are still entrapped in an intangible and unwinnable "war". Rather than attacking Iraq, we'll attack Pakistan. Same war different country. Our focus should rather be rectifying this "war on terror" which is illegitimate and corrorsive. By promoting a war against an ideology, we are entrapping ourselves in a war that can never be won. You can kill the man but never the idea.

I didnt know Obama was an idiot..now hes not getting my vote

Bush is getting exactly what he is hoping for, as evidenced by Adam's comment, and it is what I was afraid of when the Democrats won control in November 2006. He wants the responsibility of Iraq to shift from him to the Democrats. One thing is clear: Iraq is Bush's fault. Yes, the Democrats are pontificating (probably too much) about how we should get our troops to come home. And I would love for them to come home. But, unfortunately, we do have to go after the terrorists who attacked us – I think more to send a message than anything. The fact that we have wasted the last 5 years in Iraq doing nothing but making us less safe and wearing down our military is not the fault of the Democrats – it is the fault of the Administration. However, I think the Dems should probably tone down their "Bring them home now" rhetoric.

MY COMMENT IS THIS "IF SOMEONE KILLED YOUR LOVE ONE AND YOU HAVE INFORMATION THAT THE PERSON OR PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT ACT IS LOCATED IN PAKISTAN WOULD YOU GO TO IRAQ TO LOOK FOR THEM?" I AGREE WITH BARACK OBAMA!

now dont get me wrong, obama would be a million times better than bush but are we really wanting to elect another democrat who's just going to spend billions and billions more on fighting terrorism? It's like the war on drugs in some ways- theres no true culprate or way to stop it so youve really got to start looking at solving it in other ways. maybe... i dont know... diplomacy? staying out of the middle east's business?

When will everyone realize that we simply CANNOT AFFORD to police the world, no matter what the stakes are??? The USA is going broke and we're just about at the point of no return. It's time to wake up, people, and get someone into office that understands how deeply indebted we are as a country and that we cannot continue our military globe trotting! We need RON PAUL in office!

I don't understand how it is naive to pull our troops out of a civil war and put them in places where they can finally go after the people who actually attacked us on 9/11. If they are in Pakistan, we should go there. If Pakistan is our ally in the "War on Terror" (that phrase doesn't even make sense), then they should do something about the REAL al-Qaeda terrorists that are training and recruiting there. If they don't, then our stance as allies isn't logical...unless you use the logic of this administration.

I have always wondered why Pakistan is hiding Bin Laden and Bush does nothing. It does not make sense. Obama is pointing this out. I think Obama will use pressure such as foreign aid to make Pakistan do the housecleaning itself, but there are some real questions as to why we tolerate terrorists in Pakistan and then invade Iraq. Iraq is the wrong war. And we should definitely threaten Pakistan, instead of standing by and wringing our hands, wishing they will do something. This is not a naive position. It is practical.

I guess I am not a Obama fan anymore. Is this guy for real? Are you kidding me????

As an American citizen who has travelled through Pakistan and currently attends a well-accredited US university, I can tell you that if the US government thought they could traverse the difficult terrains of Iraq and Afghanistan, they havent seen anything yet. Pakistan is a much more complex and diverse terrain than both countries put together, and has nuclear power. Obama thinks that by suggesting something different he can get more votes when he just proves he doesnt know squat. Support this move into Pakistan and you support the countless deaths of more American soldiers. With this statement I've lost all respect and support for Obama.

So let me get this straight... Obama will end the war in Iraq- bring the troops home for a couple days- then wage full scale war in Pakistan and Iraq? So much for the Dems spitting rhetoric of troop exhaustion.

I concur.... leave Iraq, go into Pakistan and get back into Afghanistan so once and for all, we can GET BIN LADEN. If Musharraf doesn't let us in despite actionable intelligence of al Qaeda activity in Pakistan, we should declare Pakistan a terrorist nation and hit it, as we did Afghanistan in 2001. Enough of the same wishy-washy non-action in Washington. I agree with Barack Obama.

Again, it proves that Obama is "naive" in respect to foreign policy. Sending troops to pakistan will be a bad strategy, because it will escalate and spread the Islamist extremism around the world. Pakistan is our ally on war on terror, and Obama wants to invade our ally. It is not Pakistan that we need to send troops to; Pakistan needs to change its leader, Musharaf, who came to the power by military coup. Musharaf is a failure on war on terror.

"Obama also said he would create an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to address terrorist threats from Indonesia to Africa."

And who's going to pay for that Obama..?? "The Rich"

Lets pull our troops out of Iraq and send them into Pakistan?? How naive..

Many people are against the "war on terror" as a whole, due to the fact that you cannot wage war on an abstract idealogy. However, Obama is absolutely correct when he says that we need to focus on the areas that are actually training children and young adults to join al Qaeda and the Taliban, and leave this civil war in Iraq to be fought between the sects there. It's a disgrace that the United States hasn't found and eliminated the threat from bin Laden and his closest cronies.

This clarity of vision and purpose is why he'll be our next president.

Finally, someone who has the guts to go after Pakistan and Musharrah, who pretends to be our friend but provides safe-harbor and training grounds to terrorists of the likes of Osama bin Laden. Pakistan is a major problem, and unless we address it now, our country remains in real danger of another strike. I wonder what Obama would say in regards to the Israeli-Arab conflict? Would he agree to speaking to Hamas, who is gaining more strength in the region as reported today in the WSJ? Would he agree to the selling of millions of dollars of US technology to Mid-east "allies"? How about our heavy favoritism for Israel? Would he agree that is the fair and correct course of action?

I call that leadership, come right and say what people are afraid to say. We know who attacked us but the American people for some reason forgot about 9/11. Well Obama didnt and he's showing why he should be the President of this country