Sarah Palin once lived next door to a house that had a map of North Korea. Consequently she's got plenty of foreign policy experience.

I think we know how McCain will handle them. I am more concerned at how Obama will do it.

"I think we know how McCain will handle them"

bomb, bomb, bomb Iran/North Korea

Well we know what Obama will do, he'll want to sit down and talk, and talk and talk. When Iran or N.Korea or Russia is tired of talking they'll kick Obama's butt and take what they want. Iran will treat Obama just like the treated Jimmy Carter. I'm sure they're all over there laughing right now saying "please elect the wimpy guy with a nice speech".

Well we know what Obama will do, he'll want to sit down and talk, and talk and talk.

Yeah, remind me again how many summits Reagan had with the Soviets?

Andy, don't expect McCain to hang out in your cave, he'll be too busy following these evildoers to the gates of hell. I hate to break it to you but might no longer makes right, just ask the rest of the world. If you need work, GEICO might be hiring.

"Yeah, remind me again how many summits Reagan had with the Soviets?"

And is that all he did? Or did he also put economic and military pressure on the Soviets by placing new-era nuclear weapons in Europe, maintaining a strong military and beginning work on a satellite-based weapons system that could target individual Soviet tanks in the field from space?

If you think the Soviet Union broke down because of words, you need to study a little Cold War history.

If you think the Soviet Union broke down because of Star Wars, you need to study a little economics.

"just ask the rest of the world."

I'm really tired of hearing this from the left. I understand that we're all from the same planet and we all have to co-exist. Honestly though, we didn't become the greatest nation in the world by following the lead of other countries or by caring what they think of us. I agree that it's important to be diplomatic, try to work together with other countries to solve international problems, etc. but some of you people put WAY too much stock into what other countries think. On a side note, just about every international organization you guys tout is overrun with corruption and failure.

Joey Link: we didn't become the greatest nation in the world by following the lead of other countries or by caring what they think of us

We became great economically because the rest of the world's production capacity was in a shambles following World War II. And our political influence followed our economic domination, like it or not (and often it was not).

Times are different now, with China and other far east nations filling in as the primary provider of goods for the rest of the world. It's no longer necessary for nations to act like they are our friends, and it shows.

Putting into action the attitude of not caring what others think of us, with Bush II the idiot in charge, brought us spiraling downward to the present situation. McCain / Palin will assure this continues, if the world lasts that long.

I'll give Reagan his due for his part in the downfall of the Soviet Empire although he was helped by financing the Cold War on massive credit which is biting us in the backside today. So you righties might want to give credit to Clinton for successfully using NATO to keep the Serbs in check and stopping the genocide spreading out from the Balkans. It won't take much to either keep North Korea in check or aid a regime change--that country is on the ropes already. Iran is a much different story. If you think a few Israeli bombs with tacit U.S. approval will help U.S. interests vis a vis Iran you are dreaming.

Ok, Joey, I will engage momentarily in intelligent conversation, tell me why we insist on invading Pakistan? Imagine convincing the Pakistanis to join the effort to locate terrorists within their boarders? I know it requires meaningful dialogue but is that so devastating compared to drone missiles killing civilians?
There are many innocent victims of US aggression. Perhaps you don't care how they feel about our complicity in the demise of their loved ones, but you should, because their lives are no less important than ours.

When it comes to North Korea, it probably doesn't much matter who gets elected President. Neither one is going to abandon South Korea, and it's pretty unlikely either one will authorize a nuclear first strike. Between those two extremes the new Prez will get to choose between talking more, or launching a war with insufficient* force.

So it looks like we're gonna talk more.

[*: As much the force required is otherwise engaged and won't be available until at least 2010.]

I'd be willing to bet there's at least one Trident sub parked in the sea of Japan, and I'd be willing to bet the North Koreans know it.

Ok, Joey, I will engage momentarily in intelligent conversation, tell me why we insist on invading Pakistan? Imagine convincing the Pakistanis to join the effort to locate terrorists within their boarders? I know it requires meaningful dialogue but is that so devastating compared to drone missiles killing civilians?
There are many innocent victims of US aggression. Perhaps you don't care how they feel about our complicity in the demise of their loved ones, but you should, because their lives are no less important than ours.

Wasn't it Obama who said he'd invade Pakistan? (I know I saw him say that, but I don't know what came of it).

I made a mistake by not reading the subject of this post, but rather just the comments, so my comment was somewhat off topic. As far as wars go, I'm more with Ron Paul than Bush or other hawkish Republicans. I don't believe we should invade Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, or anywhere else unless absolutely needed. I don't consider the Iraq invasion to be absolutely needed, but I do agree with Afghanistan. I agree with you 100% about convincing those people to weed out the terrorists themselves. That's the type of diplomacy Franklin and Jefferson practiced, and which I believe in. If the government of the country refuses, there are many ways we can 'encourage' them that don't involve war. War should always be the very last option.

What I was referring to in my post was that it seems like most of the people on the left think that other countries do almost everything so much better than America, and most of the people on the right realize that America is unlike any other country on earth and we deeply value that difference. Every country has their own interests in mind, first and foremost, and although it might not be 'right', that mentality is the best thing for the people of that country. You need to take care of your own first. I see tons of problems here in the US and Obama wants to go off and give away billions more than we do now in foreign aid. Please don't compare that with what this administration has spent, because I wholeheartedly disagree with that as well. All I'm asking for is an efficient government, city, county, state, and federal. I think I'm asking for way too much. I don't understand how anyone, no matter their political views, can say we need to expand our social programs without fixing the ones we have first.

The main thing that draws me to this blog is that Jack is extremely good at finding waste in the city and state, and he reports on it. I'm sure he'd rather spend that money on something else, whereas I'd like to let the people who earned it keep it (via lower taxes), but that's another issue.

I apologize for this rant-ish post ;)

"... we didn't become the greatest nation in the world"

You can say that again.

We didn't.

Nevermind LIARS saying such a thing exists. Or only mind LIARS. Depends on your worldview and sense of History. Or lack of any.

In defense of Obama's tough guy statement, my sense of his contemplative nature is that he would learn from the carnage left by unmanned airstrikes, and modify tactics accordingly. Another distinction he represents is an ability to adapt to changing conditions. He does not strike me as the type to "doggedly stay the course" in the face of erroneous assumptions.
In addition to hearing Obama say he would follow terrorists into Pakistan if necessary, he oft repeats his vow to stop wasting 10 bil. per month in Iraq. Peace maker vs. war monger - the choice is yours. P.S. Congress is about to pass legislation spending 650 bil. on defense including the Iraq occupation. It's kinda like a golden parachute for the outgoing Admin.

This is the same old thing, back and forth, you believe Obama, I don't. Not saying I trust McCain, but I do trust him more, and that's why I'm voting against Obama in November. You can I probably don't agree that saying the course was the right thing to do, so there's no point in arguing that. No matter who gets elected, I'll bet the troops are still in Iraq in February of 2011.

I was taught when I was young not to believe everything I saw on TV and to do my own research. I was also told that you can get a good sense of what a person is like by who he or she associates themselves with. This has been proven valuable time and time again, and this time is no different. Stack up Obama's associates against McCain's, I find he's much, much worse. I'm amazed that some of you are actually for Obama, as in he's your ideal realistic candidate. This year, just like before, it's the less of two evils for me.

I find you can get a good sense of who a person is by how often they lie. It therefore surprises me that anyone can look at McCain without feeling a little revulsion.

Under Clinton, Madeline Albright talked, wined and dined Kim Jong Il, he got the reactors from the administration.
The the world was shocked (SHOCKED) that NK lied, thus where we are now.

John McCain, in a radio interview today, does not appear to know where Spain is located, or to whom he would speak, if he did know the difference between Spain and Mexico.
Personally, I think he is loosing his mental capabilities. This happens as people age. This frightens me more than anything else about him at this time. The John McCain of ten, or even five years ago simply no longer exists.

It's time to recognize how the belligerent attitude expressed by people such as Joey Link and John Fairplay above is wrecking this country by leading the charge for squandering our military and economic power and the good will of other nations. If that isn't treasonous, it's hard to imagine what the word could mean.

Excuse me? Did you not see my long post above regarding war and it being a last resort? In my opinion, spending our tax dollars on the citizens of other countries is an act of treason.

So, uh, here ya' go: Deep Events and the CIA’s Global Drug Connection, by Peter Dale Scott, Global Research, September 19, 2008, get yer treason on.

These tax dollars of yours, been spending on "citizens of other countries" for most of over 70 years, now. Just go right ahead and be a civil American ... as if your opinion has any traction left in it, after you have depreciated your awareness to zero during the last 7 years, at least.

The link is a LOT of reading. You sure you can handle that? It only amounts to all of American history, and rightwing histrionics, starting in FDR's admin and continuing up to Osama been one-of-our-agents, taxpayer-paid. I expect the link brings you more true facts than can be fit in the myth-maintained bubble-world of phony foreign fantasy which the Big Lie media has instilled ... for over 60 years.

But, really, until you can handle the facts, you don't have the ante for the political discussion game.

There may or may not be 'other' future 'wars.' I doubt there are going to be any, if we stop the powerlusting deathmongers in office now -- IMPEACH TODAY.

The present-day 'wars' going on as you read this, as a matter of fact, are best (most thoroughly) reported HERE.

Tens, I think it would be nice if Presidents were held accountable for their ... misadventures, let's call 'em. But impeaching this one is probably politically infeasible and the example might not restrain the next guy anyway.

Better would be to focus on changing the War Powers Act to strip the Presidency* of much of its current excessive liberty to start fighting without Congressional debate and approval.

[*: Yes, hawks, this might cause different problems. I think those would be better problems than the current ones.]

Without doing any research, I think I would be fore that Alan. I don't think it's right for one man to lead a nation into war without discussing it with the rest of the national leaders.