Obama’s position on Iraq is “extremely risky,” Democrat Michael O’Hanlon wrote for Politico, as quoted by William Kristol in his latest column for the New York Times. “Getting all American combat forces out of Iraq by April 2010, a position he has held while we were losing the war, during the comeback phase, and now while we are winning, is very imprudent and I continue to hope and pray that he rethinks it.”

It is a telling admission, one that should scare the bejeebus out of those who consider foreign policy one of the major issues this year, and who understand that the Middle East and especially Iraq continues to be a volatile region, in which one major mistake can cost thousands, tens of thousands even, their lives.

Obama has many strengths, but his views on Iraq are not among them. His determination to withdraw troops as soon as possible, nay, sooner, could very well result in many thousands of innocent and not so innocent Iraqis losing their lives. If the U.S. would withdraw prematurely the country could fall back into chaos, to the civil war that raged for years, until President George W. Bush implemented the now famous surge strategy.

This surge was opposed by Barack Obama but supported by John McCain. At the end of 2008 we can unequivocally say that the latter was right, whereas the former was horribly wrong.

Gambling with regards to domestic policies is fine. America’s domestic policies are not of anyone’s business, except for Americans themselves of course. But the country’s foreign policy is the business of others as well. If America’s foreign policy is unwise, the rest of the world or at least significant parts of it suffer.

Hope and prayers are not a good basis for one’s vote. If one is dependent on hope and prayer in order for the candidate one supports not to make a tragic mistake which could cost thousands their lives, one should reconsider one’s vote.

One owes it to the world.