Mississippi Governor Says He Will Not Attack Obama if He Chooses Not to Send Troops
 Printer-friendly
|
 Email article |
Related subjects: Afghanistan, In the Loop, Media, Obama administration, U.S. news, U.S. Politics Comments Off
Haley Barbour, the Republican governor of Mississippi, today told David Gregory on NBC’s Meet the Press that the president’s decision about whether to send more troops to Afghanistan should not be politicized by Republicans. He said that he’s always been of the mind that domestic politics should “stop at the border” and that the president deserves support on matters of foreign policy.
David Gregory challenged Barbour when he said that if Pres. Barack Obama “does the right thing” and as per the advice of his top generals opts to send more troops, the Republican party will stand behind him and congratulate him. Gregory noted that the implication of that statement is that if he chooses not to send more troops, Republicans will play politics on the issue and attack Obama.
Barbour’s somewhat surprising pledge was clarified when he promised that he would support the president if he sends troops but “will not criticize him” if he opts not to. Barbour can’t speak for the entire Republican party, obviously, and there will be vicious criticism of Obama’s Afghanistan policy if he does not act to win the war against insurgents there, but Gov. Barbour’s pledge sets a high standard for statesmanship that the public will be watching for.
The president’s decision is a high-stakes political choice, but if his opponents begin to turn the choice about combat troops into a political football they will risk being seen as callous and Machiavellian, while the president continues his long-running push to win better treatment for veterans suffering from physical and psychological combat-induced trauma.
The point is not unimportant: the Republican party has obsessively billed itself as the party that most firmly backs the military and honors European families, but the legacy of the Bush years reveals a certain lack of attention to the personal difficulties of the servicemen and women.
| Printer-friendly
|
Email article |
CafeSentido Partner Sites: