War is ...

The “Clash in Cleveland” last night between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton failed to do much more than to amplify the finger-pointing and name-calling that has been the central theme of their opposition to one another since they both essentially say the same thing, only perhaps Obama says them more emphatically and eloquently. There was one element of their debate, however, that has me wondering if either of them is suited for the responsibilities of the office of the president and, more specifically, of the role as commander-in-chief.

The War in Iraq continues to be a point of great concern to Americans and rightly so. We live with the knowledge that the information we had in 2002 was faulty, but this is now 2008. We cannot un-ring a bell, so what choices do we have left? Obviously, to face the music now. Obama and Clinton continue to argue about 2002 and what may or may not have happened if Obama had been there and even though Hillary “admits” to having voted for authorization, she tries to wriggle from under that vote by insisting on having been misled even though reports suggest she never actually read the information that was provided to the Congress by the administration. And Obama, who was not in the US Senate in 2002, insists he would not have voted for the war authorization.

Let’s be real. It is unfair and unrealistic for Obama to use an issue he never had an active role in to make a point. Maybe he would not have voted for the authorization, but he cannot dismiss congressional action out of hand when he lacked any real information and was not there. Think about it: at the time when the US was reeling from a devastating attack that required a military response, Saddam Hussein was implicated in that attack. Now we know the information was flawed, but we didn’t know that then. What would Barack have done? If he would have rejected military options out of hand with the information given at the time (and I say it is impossible if irresponsible for him to speculate now), what does this say about his fitness as commander-in-chief of the US armed forces tomorrow if (or perhaps, when) the US is attacked again?

Hillary, on the other hand, cannot deny her vote of record back in 2002, but she seems to be relying on blame to suggest that because she had been misled (remember, she did not actually read the intelligence report), she voted as she did rather than step up now, responsibly, and acknowledge that she is very much a part of the reason why the US is at war in Iraq now and there is nothing she can say which will alter this fact. She cannot attempt to pretend that her mere one vote or lack of knowledge was inconsequential.

In my humble opinion given these circumstances, neither of these candidates is prepared to step in and responsibly fulfill the role of commander-in-chief “from day one”. And given the reality that this War on Terror is never going to go away, we have to have someone in charge as commander-in-chief who can and will take responsibility, consider all information responsibly, collect input from the experts, make a reasonable decision and then stand by it, right or wrong. This is not an electoral game, and these are not necessarily nations with whom we have this conflict. It is a world-wide network of clever criminals and murderers bent on eradicating western culture by any means. They cannot be negotiated with because there is no one single person or entity in charge. They will not go away.

We are, in essence, about to elect a war-time president; this is reality. Obama can sweet-talk until the cows come home and he can speak most eloquently and idealistically about how he will talk with other heads of state unconditionally, but he must also acknowledge this reality of war, its implications and its impact, and so far he has failed to demonstrate any genuine appreciation for what we face. Our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is incidental to this whole reality, and neither he nor Hillary seems willing or able to grasp this. These two persons combined are not ready to step in “from day one” to serve the nation in such a capacity until they are willing to talk responsibly about current reality and move out of 2002. Today is now. It is here, and it is demanding our serious attention. Like the terrorists and the war they have wrought, now will never go away.