There is, it seems, a yawning chasm between what US voters think their presidential candidates know about the world, and what they actually know.
In a July poll asking which candidate had better knowledge of world affairs, McCain came out with a 63-26 advantage.
This is in spite of the fact that Obama one of the few senators to vote against the Iraq war, on the basis that it would spark a long and bloody Shia-Sunni struggle, and now proposes a troop withdrawal timetable which the Iraqi government is in complete agreement with (neither of which his opponent can claim). Obama also took the initiative on Zimbabwe over a year ago: in June 2007, he sponsored a senate resolution condemning Mugabe’s disregard for democratic processes and calling for action to prevent further violence before the election.
Meanwhile, McCain has consistently failed to show he knows the difference between Shias and Sunnis, still thinks there is a country called Czechoslovakia, and is worried about problems on the “Iraq/Pakistan border.” (No such border exists.) One wonders if wilful ignorance is the only criteria needed for a “strong foreign policy rating.”