[Peace-discuss] Realist v. neocon in today's NYT

[C. G. Estabrook]

...there was more than a little role reversal in the first presidential debate. 
It was Mr. Obama who seemed more aligned with President Bush’s current policy of 
authorizing American special forces to cross the Afghan-Pakistan border...

In one of the more heated moments of the debate, Mr. Obama, the Democratic 
presidential nominee, argued that he would take the war to Osama bin Laden’s 
cave door, whether Pakistan cooperated or not. And it was Mr. McCain, the 
Republican nominee, who argued that without Pakistan’s cooperation, any such 
operation was doomed.

Mr. McCain took the position that Mr. Bush had taken until this summer [-- when] 
  with no public announcement, Mr. Bush loosened the reins on American forces to 
go into sovereign Pakistani territory. Mr. Obama essentially argued on Friday 
night that Mr. Bush should have done that years ago...

...the candidates’ argument is about the “central front” in the war on 
terrorism. Mr. Obama said it was, and always has been, Pakistan’s tribal areas 
and the neighboring areas of Afghanistan ... Mr. McCain made the case that Iraq 
was the central front, noting that Mr. bin Laden himself had declared that the 
battleground with America.

[The matter becomes clearer if we realize that "central front" means the source 
of armed opposition to US military control of the ME and its resources; these 
people, for some strange reason, want the invaders out. --CGE]

...Mr. McCain repeatedly referred to Iran as an “existential threat” to Israel. 
But curiously, given his hawkish statements in the past, Mr. McCain did not 
repeat his previous argument that it might be better to attack Iran than to live 
with an Iranian nuclear weapon [because McCain's former Neocon position is 
losing to the Realist consensus in the USG that Pakistan, not Iran, is the 
"central front" (see above) --CGE].

But Mr. Obama turned the discussion to argue that even while pressing Iran, the 
United States has to engage the Iranians directly. On this, he is in agreement 
with many in the State Department [a center of the Realist consensus -- which, 
it's important to note, is not necessarily less war-like that the Neocon view: 
the Realists just want to kill different people. --CGE]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/us/politics/27policy.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin