Make the case that ObL's death increases Obama's re-election chances

[Anduril]

@Evil_Captor

Very well thought out and logical. Which is why it won’t make a bit of difference to the bulk of swing voters. “Obama killed bin Laden! He’s tough! We’re tough! Woo-hoo! USA! USA!” is the mindset you are competing with. Good luck!

If the elections were within 2-3 months, I’ll agree - but 18 months from now? I agree, however that the killing of OBL would be a very good defense against the charge of being weak but it doesn’t argue for him being strong on foreign policy.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

Killing OBL is a bigger and more obvious achievement than most. Its a major binary +/- in American history. Had Bin Laden gotten away forever, it would’ve been a disappointment on par with the fall of Saigon at least. In retrospect, eventually.

But that isn’t what happened. We took him out and regardless of your politics that’s good for Americans. Obama is POTUS, and arguably has a direct connection to the operation, so he gets to look awesome. Shit show that these wars have been, America doesn’t have to go down the lousy road it tread after Vietnam after all- as expensive and horrible as it is, at least there is the appearance of victory.

[elucidator]

You’re right. That’s the least.

[bengangmo]

@Anduril

How does killing OBL make Obama strong on foreign policy? Do you imagine some other hypothetical CIC who would not have ordered the attack? Bush Sr and Jr would have done it, Clinton would have done it, Reagan would have done it, McCain would have done it, Romney would have done it…ad infinitum. The only one I can think of who would probably hesitate would have been Carter even though I think in the end he would still decide to attack. And even if it could be argued that Carter would be weaker here, I’m not sure that the “I’m stronger than Carter on foreign policy” line is a winning campaign slogan.

Speaking as a non American, I don’t know that “strong on foreign policy” is the way that I see it. And I don’t think that “any” American president could have done it were they in the same position.

I don’t know how much this played into, but some of the factors that I see from outside the US

1. It took huge balls to run this operation without telling Pakistan
2. The operation is a “win” for the intelligence community - but this has to be viewed against a backdrop of what is now a more “co-operative” approach from America - meaning the help they get in related areas (if not specifically this raid) is greater - which probably has a very real effect on this instance
3. I would think that a part of the calculation is “what will happen if we are wrong” - and in this regard the standing of Obama makes a very real difference in having the confidence to manage a bungled raid.
4. Nothing objective to base this on - but as others have mentioned, other president’s may have either rushed this rather than being patient (leading to disaster) or used a drone attack, which may or may not have worked.

So all in all, what I am trying to say is that

1. I don’t think “any” president would have achieved the same result
2. I don’t think “all” president’s would have put themselves in a position to even try

I think both of the above are a result of Obama’s style as much as the intelligence gathering and raid itself are a win for the respective communities independent of Obama.

[Anduril]

@bengangmo

Speaking as a non American, I don’t know that “strong on foreign policy” is the way that I see it. And I don’t think that “any” American president could have done it were they in the same position.

I don’t know how much this played into, but some of the factors that I see from outside the US

1. It took huge balls to run this operation without telling Pakistan
2. The operation is a “win” for the intelligence community - but this has to be viewed against a backdrop of what is now a more “co-operative” approach from America - meaning the help they get in related areas (if not specifically this raid) is greater - which probably has a very real effect on this instance
3. I would think that a part of the calculation is “what will happen if we are wrong” - and in this regard the standing of Obama makes a very real difference in having the confidence to manage a bungled raid.
4. Nothing objective to base this on - but as others have mentioned, other president’s may have either rushed this rather than being patient (leading to disaster) or used a drone attack, which may or may not have worked.

So all in all, what I am trying to say is that

1. I don’t think “any” president would have achieved the same result
2. I don’t think “all” president’s would have put themselves in a position to even try

I think both of the above are a result of Obama’s style as much as the intelligence gathering and raid itself are a win for the respective communities independent of Obama.

1. It does take some balls to go through with the strike without informing Pakistan but given the possibility of Pakistan’s duplicity in this matter, I don’t think any CIC would have done otherwise. Also, it’s not as if past CICs have not done similar things.
2. It could very well be the case that the current foreign policy stance of the US had an impact on this operation but that has not been demonstrated. Only those enamored with Obama would think that this is a given, everyone else would just respond with “Huh?”.
3. That’s always part of the calculation and I don’t see how the standing of Obama made any difference.
4. Insofar as it’s the same intelligence and military teams, I don’t know if they will get vastly different accounts of the pros and cons of the decision to strike OBL.

[gonzomax]

Actually it has been reported that several advisors including some military ,were against the operation as too risky. Obama did not just go ahead with an operation all agreed upon. He went in the face of many and showed guts.
I still think it was illegal and wrong. But saying any other president would have done the same thing is just showing an anti Obama bias.

[Chronos]

1. It does take some balls to go through with the strike without informing Pakistan but given the possibility of Pakistan’s duplicity in this matter, I don’t think any CIC would have done otherwise. Also, it’s not as if past CICs have not done similar things.

Well, actually, it is exactly like the previous president didn’t do similar things, and the major competitor for this president explicitly said that he wouldn’t do similar things.

[elucidator]

Lets be snotty here for a moment, shall we? The ObL takedown may have only improved his chances slightly, or perhaps hugely, but there is nothing on which to base an opinion that it actually hurt his chances. Hence, we are compelled to the conclusion that it increased his re-election chances.

[Anduril]

@gonzomax

Actually it has been reported that several advisors including some military ,were against the operation as too risky. Obama did not just go ahead with an operation all agreed upon. He went in the face of many and showed guts.
I still think it was illegal and wrong. But saying any other president would have done the same thing is just showing an anti Obama bias.

There were several advisors who think the operation as too risky but they were still outnumbered. Obama went ahead with an operation the majority agreed upon.

[Anduril]

@gonzomax

But saying any other president would have done the same thing is just showing an anti Obama bias.

Really? :rolleyes:

[Rand_Rover]

@elucidator

Lets be snotty here for a moment, shall we? The ObL takedown may have only improved his chances slightly, or perhaps hugely, but there is nothing on which to base an opinion that it actually hurt his chances. Hence, we are compelled to the conclusion that it increased his re-election chances.

Nope. If someone thinks it increased his re-election chances, that is something they have to make an argument for, which is why I started this thread. It’s not the default state of affairs.

Your post is like concluding that at least one god exists because there is nothing on which to base an opinion that no gods exist.

[gonzomax]

@Anduril

Really? :rolleyes:

But suggesting it was just a consensus decision that any other president would have made , does take away from the fact that Obama did it and was successful. No other president did make that decision. It was Obama. I did not know if it it was more than half his advisors wanting to proceed, but I read that some big military guys were against it.
Pick up your eyes.

[Little_Nemo]

@Rand_Rover

Nope. If someone thinks it increased his re-election chances, that is something they have to make an argument for, which is why I started this thread. It’s not the default state of affairs.

Your post is like concluding that at least one god exists because there is nothing on which to base an opinion that no gods exist.

Would it make you feel better if we told you that it’s all been a bad dream? That you’re going to wake up in the morning and find out that Barack Obama wasn’t elected President?

Seriously, you need to recognize that your political views are not widespread. Just because you find the idea of casting a ballot of Obama unthinkable doesn’t mean the majority of voters feel that way.