Saturday night, while on a stop for cheesesteaks in South Philadelphia, Palin was questioned by a Temple graduate student about whether the U.S. should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan..
"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.
During Friday night's presidential debate in Mississippi, Obama took a similar stance and condemned the Bush administration for failing to act on the possibility terrorists are in Pakistan
Link
Now, let's note that she didn't say attack Pakistan. Let's note that she didn't say we should do it without permission from Pakistan. Let's note that she didn't say we do it based on "intelligence." She made a simple overhead statement that the media has spun while leaving out Biden's gaffe of Roosevelt addressing the country in 1929 on TV.
Now. Let's see what Hussein said:
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.
Link
Hussein opines that we act after Pakistan has refused to. He is specific. His actions are based on "high value" targets identified by "intelligence." And the attack should be anywhere in Pakistan.
Palin's comment clearly notes a defensive action where the terrorists are invading from Pakistan. It doesn't put Pakistan on notice. It doesn't threaten action. It merely notes what we "should" do.
In this life there are vast differences between "should" and "will." I think most of us know what they are.
Even the rabid supporters of Hussien....aka the MSM.
No comments:
Post a Comment