The first and only U.S. vice presidential debate between Sen. Joseph Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin just came to a close, and while I feel it was a clear win for Biden, Palin far exceeded my expectations. Viewers seem to agree – 84% of CNN viewers felt she did better than expected. Given the Governor’s recent “disastrous” interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, many believed tonight’s debate would be a repeat of such performances. Nevertheless, CNN’s opinion poll still found that debate watchers felt Biden did a better job by a 51% – 36% margin.
Now on to the foreign policy part of the debate, specifically the candidates’ responses related to the posed question, What’s the greater threat: a nuclear Iran or an unstable Pakistan? While Biden acknowledged that both scenarios were “equally dangerous,” he turned the question into a criticism of Republican presidential candidate John McCain‘s policy about terror instability. He asserted,
John continues to tell us that the central war in the front on terror is in Iraq. I promise you, if an attack comes in the homeland, it’s going to come as our security services have said, it is going to come from Al Qaeda planning in the hills of Afghanistan and Pakistan. That’s where they live. That’s where they are. That’s where it will come from.
Biden also emphasized his support for Pakistan’s democracy “by helping them not only with their military but with their governance and their economic well-being.” Sen. Barack Obama‘s running mate addressed the issue of madrassa reform, stating, “There have been 7,000 madrasses built along that border. We should be helping them build schools to compete for those hearts and minds of the people in the region so that we’re actually able to take on terrorism…” He also asserted, like Obama has in the past, that if the U.S. has credible and “actual” intelligence, they will go after Osama bin Laden, who “lives in that [border] area.”
Governor Palin responded to the question by stating,
Both are extremely dangerous, of course. And as for who coined that central war on terror being in Iraq, it was Gen. Petraeus and Al Qaeda, both leaders there and it’s probably the only thing that they’re ever going to agree on, but that it was a central war on terror is in Iraq. You don’t have to believe me or John McCain on that. I would believe Petraeus and the leader of Al Qaeda.
The candidates addressed other foreign policy issues, including diplomatic relations with Iran, the possession of nuclear weapons, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The major focus, however, was undoubtedly the war in Iraq, as well as its relation to the war in Afghanistan. Palin suggested, “The surge principles, not the exact strategy, but the surge principles that have worked in Iraq need to be implemented in Afghanistan.” She asserted the U.S. will also win in Afghanistan because of Coalition forces “securing democracy,” “fighting terrorists,” and “building schools for children.”
Biden countered that with Afghanistan, “facts matter,” asserting, “The fact is that our commanding general in Afghanistan said today that a surge – the surge principles used in Iraq will not – well, let me say this again now – our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan.” Palin responded, “Well, first McClellan did not say definitively that the surge principles would not work in Afghanistan…The counterinsurgency going into Afghanistan โ clearing, holding, rebuilding the civil society and infrastructure โ can work in Afghanistan. And those leaders who are over there, who have also been advising George Bush on this, havenโt said anything but that.”
On that point, Biden was referring to a Washington Post article released today citing the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, who stated that while more U.S. troops are needed to fight the war there, “no Iraq-style surge” will end the conflict in the war-torn country. “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ‘surge,'” but a “sustained commitment to a counterinsurgency effort that would require a political solution, he told the Post. Moreover, despite Palin’s repeated referrals to that U.S. commander as McClellan, his actual name is, Gen. David D. McKiernan. Perhaps the Governor confused him with Maj. Gen. George McClellan, who led the Union Army during the U.S. Civil War?
During the debate, Biden demonstrated a more clear understanding of Pakistan, although to be fair, Palin didn’t really address Pakistan at all, except to insist that the central front of the war on terror is in Iraq. In that regard, it was a markedly different discussion compared to last week’s presidential debate, [see CHUP’s past coverage], when the candidates argued over the issue of attacking Pakistan. Although several people felt that Obama’s comments were off base on Pakistan last week, [and felt that McCain was more knowledgeable about the terrain], it is significant that his running mate took a more insightful approach when addressing the issues facing the country. [Image from the NY Times]
For a full transcript of the debate, click here.
Very fair analysis. Palin pretty much dodged the issue of Pakistan, which is to be expected. Her handling of a potential ‘surge’ in Afghanistan was notably poor to me though.
I agree, Jay. Although, Palin didn’t just dodge the issue of Pakistan – she managed to evade almost every single question! It was almost comical if it weren’t so pathetic.
I was pleased with Biden’s response to Pakistan. Obama has certainly earned a lot of criticism for his ideas on how to deal with Pakistan, some ideas which have made me, a democrat voting for Obama, nervous for my country. However, I appreciated Biden’s clarification of Obama’s view on the issue, that they are not out to destroy Pakistan, but plan to help with reforms. Most of those who end up under the influence of these terrorist organizations are children who have nowhere to turn to and end up at madrassas. The idea of schools being created to offer these children a sense of community, learning and an outlet for their questions is a great one and needs to be implemented soon. We need more Greg Mortensons in our country!
[…] Grading the VP Debate on Pakistan October 3, 2008 at 1:55 am […]
We cannot afford to hand weapons to out enemies which is the only thing we have accomplished in Iraq. I cannot say I blame them for hating us, if they blew up our country based on false assumptions and then kept doing it for seven years I would be angry too. We armed Iraq once we are doing it again. We need to make sure before we head into any new countries that we set policies that will not arm our enemies. We need to react with diplomacy before we head into the hills of Afghanistan, even Russia couldn’t win against that country. It is hard to blow a country back to the stone ages when they are living in the stone ages. Pakistan, if we see Bin-Laden in Pakistan blow him up one strike one kill. I believe this is where Obama and Biden are leaning with diplomacy in between. We need to keep our noses out of the Middle East they have been fighting each other for as long as man has been recorded. We are not the great country we once were because we have taken our eye off prize of our own democracy. Lead by example! Take care of our own! We are in a depression and we cannot fix it with another out sourced war.
i am an Obama fan, also endorse the choice of Biden. and i think the mccain camp along with Fox news is a load of crap!!
the problem is not whether Obama feels an empathy for pakistan as we paksitani want him to. American foreign policies are not made by their sitting presidents! they are made years before, by a planning and thinktanking process in pentagon, or cia etc and are termed US interest policies.
[in other words the extension of US colonisation even (if only pschological)]
every incoming american president is only an ‘executor” of the plan already charted out. they just have to devise and convince and seek consensus on the”way” of executing it!! the republicans and democrats have their own takes on the ways of executing the policies but they are essentailly continuing the same plan!!! i am all for obama but i dont think even he wins he will be very independent in making achoic about pakistan!
yes the dems are less aggressive than the GOP sure but does that then means we only have a 4-8 years of relevant peace?
[…] sarah palin, security services, sen joseph biden, vice presidential debate, vp debate Read more at: CHUP! – Changing Up Pakistan This post […]
Good analysis.
Yay, CHUP made the cut for C-SPAN’s “debate hub” – http://debatehub.c-span.org/index.php/10/03/
This is hilarious, a friend just passed it on:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/3/43222/8057/718/618653
Kalsoom,
As always, great job of trying to quickly putting together an analysis.
No one expected that Sarah Palin would do well and she has surprised everyone (including Biden!). Even the moderator was not fair to Palin and was much softer towards Biden, and that was a fair grounds for a debate?
What I came out of this debate is that I rather have a VP that will follow the directions of the President than a powerful VP that will overshadow the policies and direction of the presidency. Biden is more powerful (politically and influence wise) than Obama and I fear the Cheney reminders in him all over again. Biden is and will remain an insider of Capital Hill politics. Insiders like Biden bear the grunt of blame for our problems today. This has nothing to do with party lines.
I got a great laugh when Biden associated OBL and AQ as the greatest threat for peace in the world. OBL and AQ are myths and for someone “bright” as Biden to make these remarks, be prepared for US troops to enter into every city in Pakistan, until this myth of OBL and of AQ is found in Pakistan, this so called war on terror will not end. They will continue trying to find these threats, very much like WMD in Iraq that Bush had us believing.
Seriously, who do you folks see as the greatest threat to world peace?
p.s. I did not even cover economic issues (this readers on this site do not appear to be concerned about this vital issue).
Tariq,
We are concerned about this vital issue. I’m sorry you feel we aren’t just because we have not touched upon that issue in our comments. I’m not sure which economic issues you’re referring to. If you’re referring to American econ issues, we are not discussing it because this is generally a forum in regards to Pakistani issues, so we tend to speak about those here instead. Those that want to comment on American issues are welcome to do so, but I’m just clarifying why most of us have not.
If you are referring to Pakistani economics, I don’t think the Presidential campaign has direct influence over our economy. As “s” pointed out, policies concerning Pakistan (including the economy and any kind of investment) are determined by congress and the free market, not solely by the head of the Executive branch, and certainly not by Biden/Palin.
We are concerned, we just don’t think that was the focal part of the debate as to where Pakistan is concerned on this CHUP forum. Again, people are welcome to discuss American politics and issues, but if others choose not to, please don’t assume what our concerns are just by what we may have omitted in our comments.
Maria,
A healthy economy here in the US has a direct relationship of how leaders proceed with world issues. You cannot separate the two.
I shall refrain from saying anything further here on this site. My views are maybe not what people wish to hear/read these days. It is okay, I will still visit. I have the utmost respect for Kalsoom and her efforts. It is best that I do not tilt or try to create any controversies here.
Thank you for taking the time to respond.
Best regards to all!
Tariq,
Don’t let the status quo [on this site]’s political leanings impact you expressing your views. That goes for everyone who may or may not agree with my own liberal thoughts. CHUP is supposed to allow for a dialogue, which requires different views on topics. Although I may not agree with your support for McCain, I am still willing to listen to it. This election has entrenched people’s opinions on party politics, and that has been detrimental to actual debate. I’ll do my best to not let that happen here.
Thx,
k
@Tariq
Well its wasn’t a blood bath as everybody expected but that doesn’t mean that Palin did well. Judging by your expectation she would be victorious if she was semi coherent and moderately informed after pre-debate cram sessions. Well that she was, but isn’t that a fairly low standard for the VP to begin with? She was able to spew rehearsed lines,repeat the following phrases “darn right”, “bless their hearts” and “you betcha”, and endlessly describe John McCain as a “maverick”.
In my opinion the main reason for her doing ok is because Biden never really challenged her on her knowledge and opinion. He went after John McCain the entire time, he never exposed the fairly obvious shallowness of her knowledge. He also displayed real knowledge and insight into issues backed by facts and statistics.
How can you compare Biden to Cheney? Or how can Biden remind you of Cheney? She clearly wants more power for herself than the Constitution grants — or than Cheney took for himself. So she wants to have all the power that Cheney has and plus some more. While Biden emphasized a more traditional role for VP. Who do you think is more dangerous:
a) some one with no grasp on health, economic, social, and foreign policy who wants more power as VP
b) some with experience and knowledge of all of the issues above who wants less and more traditional power as VP.
Outdated views, attitude of flexing muscle to get your way, and breeding fear and hate are the greatest threat to world peace.
While I tend to support Obama on an overall basis, I do agree with some of the points Tariq has made above.
Palin and McCain have come across as a unified team while it seems that Biden seems to have quite a few differences with Obama and might end up overshadowing him (through his contacts & experience).
I do feel that Palin ended up making a fool out of herself, however she succeeding in showing the differences between Biden and Obama and reiterating that point throughout the debate.
Tariq,
I by no means wished to have you stop commenting on the site. I was trying to point out that we may have opinions on certain subjects even if we don’t discuss them on this forum, and would simply prefer if you don’t make assumptions on our concerns merely by what was omitted in our comments. I am also an Economics major, so I’m well aware how economies are intertwined. I was merely pointing out that Congress and the free market have more power over both economies that Biden and Palin do (in reference to econ concerns in the VP debate).
We come to this forum because we like to discuss different viewpoints of our fellow Pakistanis. That is what this forum is about. Whether you’re liked, or disliked, your opinion is important. If we all held the same view, we would not need such a forum or even a democracy! Sometimes people don’t like what I say, and I hear them out or I remain resolute in my views and try to explain them. That is the beauty of democracy, even on CHUP. No need to hold yourself back, but you should also be prepared to face criticism and questions on your views. I look forward to seeing your posts.
Cheers,
Maria S.
[…] Link to the original site Author: wtfpakistan Time: Saturday, October 4th, 2008 at 4:06 am Category: Pakistan Comments: You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. RSS: You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Navigation: « The Battle of Bajaur […]
@ US Congress, Politicians, total financial ruin, rescue
funding of 700 billions US$ (from where ?) long live
Saudi & Kuwaiti donners paying the rent for US Army,
enormous deficient balance of payments, Blance of
trade decline towards red zone, Revenu, income being
only its waring army’s rent from Arabs, there are half a
dozens of enormous ” holes” or insisible figures in the
Budget. The new-old poors in USA matching up the scale,
could become worst than Latinos in the south, US
National Budget being a fiscal fraud, bringing
USA at the brink of being declared a bankrupt country,
but World Bank and IMF’s directors have to shut their
mouths, otherwise???
and on the top of it, OBL and A-Q !!ยจ!!
rising share price, difficult to manage a fictive porte-folio,
do’nt know for how long ?? what a murdering fatal
” laughing stock ” !!!
@ US Congress, Politicians, total financial ruin, rescue
funding of 700 billions US$ (from where ?) long live
Saudi & Kuwaiti donners paying the rent for US Army,
enormous deficient balance of payments, Blance of
trade decline towards red zone, Revenu, income being
only its waring army’s rent from Arabs, there are half a
dozens of enormous ” holes” or unsizeble figures in the
Budget. The new-old poors in USA matching up the scale,
could become worst than Latinos in the south, US
National Budget being a fiscal fraud, bringing
USA at the brink of being declared a bankrupt country,
but World Bank and IMF’s directors have to shut their
mouths, otherwise???
and on the top of it, OBL and A-Q !!ยจ!!
rising share price, difficult to manage a fictive porte-folio,
do’nt know for how long ?? what a murdering fatal
” laughing stock ” !!!
@ Disaster after disaster for USA
Clinets insovencies, Bankrutpcies of US Banks,
NYSE Dow Jones drop far less than 10.000 points
what a tragic APOCALYPTIC END.
Hello, is Tariq there please ?
@ Partial Nationalizations of Banks in difficulties in UK
even with 58 Billions of Euro rescue.
Island declared Bankrupt, asking money from Russia,
EU bank interest rates decreased 1/2% but even then ?
NYSE DJ-2 % , Paris Cac 40 -8 % , London -5%
early morning absolute calm & fresh, better go and get
my quick coffee/ croisant, baguette, news papers !
and hot discussions !!
@Maria S,
if I were you I would go down to my Bank first thing in
the morning to check if my money is still “there” ?
Tariq was and is probabaly right.
Any impact on Armament Industry ? only I wished !
Chiao chiao
[…] a doubt has been a hot topic in the 2008 elections, [see CHUP’s coverage of the presidential and VP debates]. As a result, the U.S. elections have been widely covered in Pakistan. An editorial in The News […]
[…] a doubt has been a hot topic in the 2008 elections, [see CHUP’s coverage of the presidential and VP debates]. As a result, the U.S. elections have been widely covered in Pakistan. An editorial in The News […]