2007-08-08 06:14:09 · 4 answers · asked by Daler™ 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
He doesn't -- that's the stupid interpretation that Romney put on the what he actually said. And Romney did it to score political points.
Go back to the original speeches and listen to his statements in context -- that is, if the reality actually matters to you.
Obama said he would meet with leaders from countries that are currently hostile to us, because it's always better to talk with people and try to find a solution before bombing them.
And Obama never said he wanted to launch an attack AGAINST Pakistan (the govt) -- he said we should go after the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 -- he said we should go after Al Qaeda.
And if Al Qaeda is hiding IN Pakistan, and the Pakistan govt will not act, then we have to -- to stop Al Qaeda.
What's wrong with going after the terrorists who attacked us, but still be willing to engage in diplomacy with countries that have not yet attacked us?
2007-08-08 08:23:51 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm no longer precisely an Obama supporter, yet in his protection, there have been a lot of caveats in his recent statements on invasion of Pakistan that the media handed over or is removing of context.
2016-12-15 09:16:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pakistan has nukes..I wouldn't invade
2007-08-08 06:25:00 · answer #3 · answered by John 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you follow the news at all? If you had been you would know just how much they are allies.
2007-08-08 06:22:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋