Fact Check


While Obama and McCain debate whether or not they should speak in public about US military action inside Pakistan, it is important to note that Pakistan's new President Zardari (not Kadari as McCain said) made clear this week "we cannot allow our sovereignty to be violated by friends." Pakistan argues that any attack plays into the hands of terrorists.



Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the NPR.org Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

McCain came out ahead on this point giving the better answer. Barak's sounded more like Bush to me on this topic and John more like Barak. Very surprised by Barak's answer that seems at odds with his major point about improving our image as a nation abroad. Bombing within a sovereign nation against their will sounds more like war and the Bush doctrine. Re-think your Pakistan position please Senator.

Sent by Bob | 11:24 PM | 9-26-2008

I completely agree, that debate made up my mind about Obama. I guess Americas only chance is Ron Paul.

Sent by sdfds | 10:21 AM | 9-27-2008

FACT CHECK: McCain also said Pakistan was a "failed state" before Musharraf came to power, which I don't think any Pakistan experts would agree with.

Sent by JDB | 11:22 AM | 9-27-2008

It does bear remembering that Obama said this in reference to high level terrorist leaders and only if Pakistan was unable or unwilling to effectively act against them.

I don't think Obama would support the way things are being done now where attacks are being made across the border on a regular basis without Pakistani approval or even notification.

Sent by David Stewart | 3:04 PM | 9-27-2008

Boy I wish they would have hammered at this subject a little longer during the debate. Pakistan seems to be THE central front in the war in Afghanistan and this summers political upheaval and violence only serves to complicate the overall situation. I wanted to hear more specifics about how each candidate would handle the situation with the unstable Pakistani gov't and their growing terrorist problems.

The recent trouble in this country and the conflict in Georgia are to me the two chief foreign policy subjects that needed to be addressed in this debate and I felt that neither received the full attention it deserved.

Sent by Dan K. | 4:49 PM | 9-27-2008

That's a good observation and a point well made. I can't imagine an Obama administration acting without considering and understanding the consequences. But as a topic of debate he could clarify how he would engage Pakistan. I remain a bit confused.

Sent by Bob | 5:00 PM | 9-27-2008