[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Since Bush authorized the US "surge" (something McCain supported), the US has been making significant progress.

Significant progress? In what way? They've changed the criteria for clasifying casaulties to drive the stats way down. They've limited the ability of reporters to cover stories which has restricted the flow of information. The majority of the military has been shifted to select pockets of the country, allowing militias to take control of complete regions. The military gave up most of the country to secure Baghdad. I guess that's a step in the right direction, but we have no idea what the result is to the rest of country because the information flow has been resticted and the numbers changed so they are no longer comparable to previous months.

Originally Posted by Azure

Some, yes, are simply looking at the message of 'change' and jumping on his bandwagon without REALLY knowing what he stands for.

I'm very surprised by the 'blind support'.....considering CP argued for years upon end that THAT support was a very big problem with the Bush administration.

Where is this blind support?

Is that not disturbing to you? It is to me, especially considering that Obama has yet to campaign based on his actual platform. Very scary....after the past 8 years, that people will still blindy follow someone because he is a great public speaker.

Please name a candidate that has mentioned their platform or campaigned on it. Ron Paul. That's it. The rest have been doing nothing but appealing to their base and relying on their personality. The Republican race was a complete joke because they didn't touch on a single important issue in teir debates. It was all cheesy TV. The Democrats weren't much better, but at least they stayed away from the religious bullcrap.

Frankly, platforms are hard to nail down right now, as the candiates don't have the authority to define policy or establish programs. The real campaigning will being once the primaries are over, and that's when platforms will be cast in stone with support of the parties. At that point we'll know what these candidates can or cannot do.

I would think that it is Obama's responsibility to bring that information to the public....and not force the public to go search for it.

Bull. We live in a world of sound bites, so the candidates don't get a chance to outline their platform, it just doesn't sell to the media. Its up to the electorate to get educated. Each of the candidates has a web site published with their respective positions outlined. Get off your lazy ass and look up the information.

Whats your point? I've looked at every candidate's platform....

The how the hell can you be talking about candidates not having platforms? If you've looked at them all, then you know Obama has a solid platform, just like the other candiates.

Look at it this way....with the recent surge, we have reason to be optimistic....and face it, a stable and democratic Iraq would go a LONG ways to solve the problems in the ME. Especially if they can function by themselves.

Yeah, in a country the size of California, the surge has secured an area the size of Los Angeles County.

I keep hearing about Obama's supposed lack of foreign policy experience, but the guy has more grounded world view than any other candidate. The guy has actually grew up in other countries, has been exposed to multiple cultures, including the Islamic culture which should be extremely advantageous in dealing with the Middle Eastern issues. I think he's a guy who brings great potential to improving foreign relations immediately (he would be viewed as a change in American attitudes), something the other candidates would likely have to work through that much harder (McCain would be perceived as much of the same, and Clinton would likely not be accepted at all in the Islamic world).