It remains to be seen whether Senator Obama backs off from, or revises, or "clarifies" the comments he made this morning regarding Pakistan. But, for the time being, it reminds me of Senator Kerry's nomination acceptance speech at the 2004 Democratic national convention.

Kerry stressed his military experience, claimed a pro-military and pro-war stance, and tried to put forward a stance of being tougher on terrorism than the President, with the goal of "killing" the terrorists, etc. That false pro-war veneer did not fool many people for very long.

At any rate, without regard to whether Obama backs away from his reported comments, I certainly don't trust him (or Clinton or Edwards) to ever actually take necessary future military action, whether it be in Pakistan or Iran.

I would trust most of the leading and prospective Republican candidates (e.g. F. Thompson, Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Hunter, Huckabee) to actually take action as necessary, in Pakistan or elsewhere (regardless of the other strengths and weaknesses of each of these candidates).

For example, see the New York Times of July 20 (article says "Mr. Giuliani also said that fighting the war in Iraq did not have to preclude pursuing Al Qaeda in ... Pakistan) or the USA Today of July 19 (article entitled "Giuliani: U.S. should focus more on Pakistan") to see what one GOP candidate (Giuliani) has already stated regarding Pakistan.

Undoubtedly, an internet search would show similar comments by the other Republican candidates.