Obama Speaks
23 October 2008 3:15 pm by Taylor Marsh
BY TAYLOR MARSH
Joe
Klein has an interview with Obama that is a must read. Besides the idea
of talking with the Taliban, this exchange is a vast improvement from the GOP
model.
[Q] Let me ask you about a situation like that. I have been collecting accounts
of your meeting with David Petraeus in Baghdad. And you had [inaudible] after
he had made a really strong pitch [inaudible] for maximum flexibility. A lot
of politicians at that moment would have said [inaudible] but from what I
hear, you pushed back.
[BO] I did. I remember the conversation, pretty precisely. He made the case
for maximum flexibility and I said you know what if I were in your shoes I
would be making the exact same argument because your job right now is to succeed
in Iraq on as favorable terms as we can get. My job as a potential commander
in chief is to view your counsel and your interests through the prism of our
overall national security which includes what is happening in Afghanistan,
which includes the costs to our image in the middle east, to the continued
occupation, which includes the financial costs of our occupation, which includes
what it is doing to our military.[...] Our differences don’t necessarily derive from differences in sort of,
or my differences with him don’t derive from tactical objections to his approach.
But rather from a strategic framework that is trying to take into account
the challenges to our national security and the fact that we’ve got finite
resources.[Q] But you didn’t have to make that point.
[BO] No well I think that I did, I felt it necessary to make that point
even though I tried not to talk about it publicly, not knowing sort of what
the terms of our discussion were. Precisely because I respect the Petraeus
and [inaudible], precisely because they’ve done a good job and because my
job as a candidate is preparing myself to be commander in chief. And I want
to make sure that I’m taking their arguments seriously, they understand I’m
taking their argument seriously. I want our military brass and our mid level
officers to all feel that I am going to be listening to them. This notion
that I’m not paying attention to them is nonsense. I’m listening to them very
carefully and I take their advice with great seriousness. I just want them
to know that I’ve got a, I potentially will have a broader task at hand. …
One of the things we hear ad nauseam from Republicans is that it’s important
to do what the generals say. In Woodward’s latest book you get a lot of that.
Bush saying it’s up to Casey, etc. Then when Casey doesn’t comply with Bush’s
ideas he replaces him. A real leader would listen and obviously respect the
general’s position, then order Casey to do what is required to implement the
president’s foreign policy vision, which is global, not country to country.
Bush didn’t have the guts to take responsibility, so we drifted for years. There’s
a reason they call it commander in chief. You’re not supposed to lateral decisions
to give yourself an out. The buck stops at the president, which is not to be
passed back down the chain.
Obama seems to get that part of the job. Truman got it too. He respected the
military, but when they treated him disrespectfully or ignored his commander
in chief role, not to mention his orders, he fired people. America’s military
takes orders from the civilians in Washington. It’s the president’s main job,
especially when a war is going on.
