In Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, he argues that eudaimonia is the ultimate goal in life. Eudaimonia roughly translates to happiness or human flourishing. One of the ways in which eudaimonia is achieved is by exercising the mind. This blog is intended to help all of us reach eudaimonia through political discourse. This cannot be possible without YOU the reader, and YOU the respondent. Hence, youdaimonia.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Obama's Comments Disqualify Him from the Presidency?

During Thursday night's VP debate Sarah Palin used a statement made by Barack Obama to argue that he is unfit for the Presidency. Here is what she was referring to:



The inconvenient truth for Governor Palin is that Barack Obama is correct. The AP did a fact check on this claim, and found that in 2007 the U.S. military was responsible for more civilian deaths than the insurgents (i.e. the Taliban and al-Qaeda) we are there to fight. The reason for this is because the U.S. diverted its attention from Afghanistan to Iraq. There are currently 146,000 troops in Iraq (more than before the surge, which is another bogus claim Palin made during the debate), but only 32,000 in Afghanistan. As a result, the U.S. has become increasingly reliant on air strikes. The fact of the matter is that a bomb, no matter how precise, cannot discriminate between insurgents and civilians better than troops on the ground. This has caused real problems in Afghanistan because it creates sympathy for the Taliban's cause.

I'd also add that Defense Secretary Bob Gates recently issued an apology for recent air strikes that killed 90 civilians in Afghanistan, but I don't hear Sarah Palin calling for his resignation.

So despite Palin's claim, I think these comments show that he is qualified to be President because he understands the current situation on the ground, and knows how to weigh the consequences of various military tactics.


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I really don't understand McCain's strategy of chasing the 25% of Americans that would buy this crap. Are they just gambling that a riled up base will be more reliable on election day than Obama's relatively young supporters?