Where is the Outrage? Posted by Michael Cohen

Today the Washington Post has a pretty interesting story about the Bush Administration's increased military activity in Pakistan:

The United States has escalated its unilateral strikes against al-Qaeda members and fighters operating in Pakistan's tribal areas, partly because of anxieties that Pakistan's new leaders will insist on scaling back military operations in that country, according to U.S. officials.

Over the past two months, U.S.-controlled Predator aircraft are known to have struck at least three sites used by al-Qaeda operatives. The moves followed a tacit understanding with Musharraf and Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani that allows U.S. strikes on foreign fighters operating in Pakistan, but not against the Pakistani Taliban, the officials said.

About 45 Arab, Afghan and other foreign fighters have been killed in the attacks, all near the Afghan border, U.S. and Pakistani officials said. The goal was partly to jar loose information on senior al-Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, by forcing them to move in ways that U.S. intelligence analysts can detect. Local sources are providing better information to guide the strikes, the officials said.

Here's my question, where is John McCain's outrage? As some of you may remember, back in February he lambasted Barack Obama for "confused leadership" and "inexperience" because he "once suggested bombing our ally Pakistan." Obviously, if McCain got that upset about simply "suggesting" we bomb in Pakistan I can only imagine how angry he might get when he finds out that it's actually happening!

Oddly, I have yet to hear any criticism of the Bush White House emanating from the McCain campaign . . .

Comments

[NYer]

According to the article you quote, "The moves followed a tacit understanding with Musharraf and Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani that allows U.S. strikes on foreign fighters operating in Pakistan, but not against the Pakistani Taliban, the officials said."

As I recall, McCain criticized Obama for publicly suggesting that under certain circumstances he would attack targets in Pakistan without Musharraf's permission. I believe McCain's view was that these comments counter-productively undercut a U.S. ally.

I don't understand the basis for your claim that McCain's position should make him outraged that the U.S. has struck al-Qaeda targets with Musharraf's tacit approval, particularly where Musharraf's power appears to be waning and we may not get such approval in the future.

[John SF]

Also, if you want/have to strike, and third-party approval is reluctant, or their approval downplayed for domestic reasons, or if they disapprove but aren't prepared to make an issue of it, then it might be best to strike and NOT TALK ABOUT IT.