When Roy Cordato discussed the concept of Barack Obama?s administration representing ?George W. Bush on steroids,? he was referring to failed economic stimulus measures.
Read the latest Newsweek, and you might get the impression that the same principle applies to military policy as well.
Stephen L. Carter?s article ?Man of War? features the following subheadline: ?How does Barack Obama differ as a commander in chief from his swaggering predecessor? A lot less than you might think.? Plus the article opens this way:
The election of Barack Obama, according to critics and admirers alike, ushered in a new era in American foreign policy. Perhaps. But it did not usher in a new era in American warfare. Under Obama, we fight in much the same way that we did under his predecessor?for similar reasons, with similar justifications. Strip away the soaring rhetoric and you begin to discover what probably we should have known from the start: when it comes to war, presidents do what they think they must.
Obama might have run in 2008 as the peace candidate, but next time around he will be running as a war president. This simple truth cannot be avoided.
Paging Cindy Sheehan.
