The McCain Thread

[Midnyte_Sun]

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain vowed in a speech on Wednesday to make freedom of religion a key foreign policy issue if he is elected to the White House in November.

"There is no right more fundamental to a free society than the free practice of religion," he said at Oakland University in the state of Michigan.

"Behind walls of prisons and persecuted before our very eyes in places like China, Iran, Burma, Sudan, North Korea and Saudi Arabia are tens of thousands of people whose only crime is to worship God in their own way." He added: "Whether in bilateral negotiations, or in various multinational organizations to which America belongs, I will make respect for the basic principle of religious freedom a priority in international relations."

According to McCain, no society "that denies religious freedom can ever rightly claim to be good in some other way. And no person can ever be true to any faith that believes in the dignity of all human life if they do not act out of concern for those whose dignity is assailed because of their faith."



So is he pandering the conservative base, tuning up the drums of war, or stating a genuine concern that he has? What do you think?



For the full article, click below.
McCain to make religious freedom a key foreign policy issue
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080507/pl_afp/usvoterepublicanmccain

He's pandering to the conservative base, but really wooing the military hawks. For some reason offenders like Pakistan can get away with it (Christians are attacked constantly), but Iran can't? UAE supported the Taliban along with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and yet they were never punished or sanctioned during their public support for the regime.

The most he's doing is pandering, because if he's elected in office, he's going to make a couple complaints to those nations like all President's have done..but it's not for religious freedom, its for strategic interest.

 

[Lighthouse]

Good speech. Now if only he could get some fundamentalists in this country to accept that.

 

[The Senator]

We just need to make sure that we return to diplomacy. Even more important, that we have a foreign policy that is not the equivalent of "bomb and ask questions later." We need to get back to what this country has been. Taking on human rights abuses around the world is the right thing to do.

Bombing first and asking questions later may be appropriate in some circumstances. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon, then I wholeheartedly support the destruction of their nuclear facilities.

 

[Marx]

Bombing first and asking questions later may be appropriate in some circumstances. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon, then I wholeheartedly support the destruction of their nuclear facilities.

It is appropriate in some circumstances, not all.

 

[rdh007]

I don't see it as ever appropriate. Having said that, I'm not against bombing and the questions don't have to be asked over the course of months or even weeks.

This speech just shows how stupid Iraq was. Afghanistan made perfect sense. If we'd have just stayed in Afghanistan, made a concerted effort to kill Bin Laden, and used the FBI/CIA/Special Ops to deal with terrorists (real terrorists, not dictators we used to be friends with) we could be making a difference in the world right now. Instead all our resources are focused on a war from 1990.

Regardless of our military commitments, we can still be a strong player on the diplomatic front. We need to do so, and eradicating the numerous human rights abuses in countries such as Iran and China would be the best way to do that.

If we can find a candidate who is interested in diplomacy (which would mean talking to people, but who could that be?) and if we hadn't engaged in a pre-emptive war; we might have a leg to stand on. But if I was the leader of a foreign country, I wouldn't take us seriously anymore. Not unless America had it's bombs pointed at me. And then we get to, what happens when we piss off everyone?

 

[Marx]

I don't see it as ever appropriate. Having said that, I'm not against bombing and the questions don't have to be asked over the course of months or even weeks.

I just believe that Iran is a different story. That being said, we had better have EVERY bit of intelligence correct before we would make such a move.

This speech just shows how stupid Iraq was. Afghanistan made perfect sense. If we'd have just stayed in Afghanistan, made a concerted effort to kill Bin Laden, and used the FBI/CIA/Special Ops to deal with terrorists (real terrorists, not dictators we used to be friends with) we could be making a difference in the world right now. Instead all our resources are focused on a war from 1990.

I couldn't agree with you more RDH.

If we can find a candidate who is interested in diplomacy (which would mean talking to people, but who could that be?) and if we hadn't engaged in a pre-emptive war; we might have a leg to stand on. But if I was the leader of a foreign country, I wouldn't take us seriously anymore. Not unless America had it's bombs pointed at me. And then we get to, what happens when we piss off everyone?

Our country is going to face alot of problems for a long time thanks to this administration. Our credibility in the eyes of those around the rest of the world is going to take some serious damage control to resolve. It is going to take more than one term to fix.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

I think it's insane. America's not in a good place to tell those countries what to do. Fix your own country,and let them do it them selfs.

 

[The Senator]

Except America has religious freedom.... so I don't know what we have to fix....

 

[StorminNorman]

I think it's insane. America's not in a good place to tell those countries what to do. Fix your own country,and let them do it them selfs.

America is like Nazi Germany!

 

[Marx]

America is like Nazi Germany!

(So this is completely OFF TOPIC but I love your avatar and caption! ALF was great! )

Carry on.

 

[rdh007]

It is going to take more than one term to fix.

Agreed. So when Sherrod Brown becomes President after eight years of Obama/Zinni, maybe we'll start this process.

 

[Darkly Dexter]

All of those countries have huge problems with human rights abuses, and I will support any president's efforts to work towards ending those abuses.

as long as those efforts be peaceful...

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

America is like Nazi Germany!

No. It's not that,it's just outside of their country limits their voices isn't as strong as they think.

 

[bunk]

Wasn't really sure where to put this... I just thought it was awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSAOQuLxSdY

 

[The Senator]

as long as those efforts be peaceful...

That depends on the situation. I would support military aid in Darfur.

 

[Marx]

That depends on the situation. I would support military aid in Darfur.

As would I.

 

[Superman4ever]

All of those countries have huge problems with human rights abuses, and I will support any president's efforts to work towards ending those abuses.

And in most of those countries we've (the west, but the US in general) supported those tyrannical despots entry to power.

 

[Marx]

And in most of those countries we've (the west, but the US in general) supported those tyrannical despots entry to power.

You do bring up a valid point.

 

[The Senator]

And in most of those countries we've (the west, but the US in general) supported those tyrannical despots entry to power.

It's not about eliminating despots from power... it's more about ending human rights abuses... many of these human rights violations date back long before some of the current leaders took charge... many of China's human rights problems date back to the Cultural Revolution, the Middle East's human rights problems date back centuries... there's no reason why we can't be a vocal opponent to these disgusting practices...

 

[rdh007]

Doesn't our support of torture put us on tenuous ground?

 

[The Senator]

Doesn't our support of torture put us on tenuous ground?

George W. Bush's support of torture puts us on tenuous ground now, but we're talking about a future administration...

 

[fifthfiend]

It's not about eliminating despots from power... it's more about ending human rights abuses... many of these human rights violations date back long before some of the current leaders took charge... many of China's human rights problems date back to the Cultural Revolution, the Middle East's human rights problems date back centuries...

America's human rights problems date back centuries. You live in a country that historically practiced chattel slavery, was still lynching people all of forty years ago and today imprisons a greater percentage of its population than any other nation on Earth.* It's also probably worth mentioning what I'm sure is the entirely coincidental fact that the group of people who were historically slaves were the same group of people who were lynched which are the same group of people which make up the majority of those imprisoned.

there's no reason why we can't be a vocal opponent to these disgusting practices...

Yes there is; we actively support the governments which perpetuated these disgusting practices, and have systematically undermined any attempt to establish a government which might have halted these disgusting practices. The only time the US government pretends to care about a country's human rights record is when that country has a resource we want to control.





*Unless you're actually British or something, I mean I don't know.

 

[Superman4ever]

It's not about eliminating despots from power... it's more about ending human rights abuses... many of these human rights violations date back long before some of the current leaders took charge... many of China's human rights problems date back to the Cultural Revolution, the Middle East's human rights problems date back centuries... there's no reason why we can't be a vocal opponent to these disgusting practices...

Would you care to specify which human rights abuses the Mid-East has had problems for centuries? Was it when the crusaders were killing us mercilessly, without discrimination? Was it when the Mongolians were killing us mercilessly without discrimination? How about the Turks? Which, and who's, Mid-East are you referring to, what time...under who's rule? When was the last time the Arabs were in control of their own destiny and not under foreign rule?

Cause I think the answer to that would be 1258? Hm...

For the most recent century, western powers have been put in despots that would either be a puppet to their whims or give them cheap oil, and, as such, the West could be blamed for EVERY single human rights violation done by their "friends".

Saudi Arabia has a HORRIBLE royal family in power, but Bush proudly holds hands with "Prince" Abdullah. So protest that, speak about that...don't just blindly cop-out and say the bad, evil "Mid-East" has had human rights violations for blah, blah...take some responsibility for your own government. Remember the "We the People" crap? We admonish other people for not doing so, so take your own meds here. Kuwait has a ridiculous government with unheard of (swept under the rug) human rights violations against Iraqis (and they're own people), but we jumped to save them against Iraq (who was a friend that gave us cheap oil UNTIL he threatened other friends that gave us cheap oil).

So, its fine that it's "not about eliminating despots from power", but how about NOT putting despots in power? That would be new! That would be REVOLUTIONARY! And would save us a LOT of human lives (and taxpayer money) from going to waste removing the next puppet (that'll give us cheap oil) who gets out of line and invades another puppet government that gives us cheap oil. Or at least doesn't sell it to China!

 

[Superman4ever]

George W. Bush's support of torture puts us on tenuous ground now, but we're talking about a future administration...

McCain wouldn't change a damn thing, and would probably make things a LOT worse.

 

[The Senator]

My argument has nothing to do with who has been put in power by whom. It simply has to do with human rights abuses in individual nations all across the world. My concerns are religious freedoms, as well as freedom of expression. People should be able to follow whatever faith they want to, regardless of the nation under which they live. People should be able to express themselves, regardless of the views of those in power. Christians shouldn't be imprisoned in China because they are on a mission; homosexuals shouldn't be killed in Iran because they are gay.

And, to transcend your overly pompous response, I do not believe that most of these leaders should be overthrown. This simply has to do with exercising diplomatic power to eliminate some of these abuses.