The American public seems to be growing weary of American aggression in foreign nations. According to a USA Today Gallup Poll, 63 percent of Americans now believe the war in Iraq should have never started. Both of the presidential candidates this year are calling themselves advocates of change. But when a presidential candidate parodies the Beach Boys song “Barbara Ann,” singing, “Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran,” the time has come to start questioning the type of changes that they are proposing.

John McCain is responsible for the quote above. His foreign policy is one of “action” and protecting America’s interests. The Democratic candidate, Barack Obama, has repeatedly stated that his foreign policy would be one of diplomacy. Obama wants to open talks with all nations, even the two remaining states in the “Axis of Evil,” North Korea and Iran.

The Iranian bid for becoming a nuclear power has become a very controversial issue, even with Iran repeatedly denying that they are pursuing a nuclear weapons program. John McCain has called it “the most serious crisis we have faced, outside of the war on terror, since the end of the Cold War.” Even Obama, the advocate of diplomacy, said in 2007 that military force cannot be ruled out when dealing with the Iranian regime, which he described as a “threat to all of us.”

McCain has not proposed that he will meet with Iran and try to end this crisis peacefully. Instead of diplomacy, he has said he would try to pressure other nations to join America in imposing harsh sanctions against Iran. Military action would be the second step, providing that the sanctions do not work. “Would it be a difficult military option? Sure it would be a difficult military option,” McCain said, “But you cannot remove it from the table.”

On Meet the Press, McCain described what he thinks the world would look like if America was at war in Iraq and Iran: “We’re going to prevail, and we will win, and it’ll be one of the best things that’s happened to America and the world in a long time.”

Obama, on the other hand, does not think military conflict is the only option. While he doesn’t think it is out of the question, he proposes that other options be considered. “If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn’t stand a chance. And we should use that position of strength that we have to be bold enough to go ahead and listen.” Obama continued, saying, “We should find out other areas of potential common interest, and we can reduce some of the tensions that have caused us so many problems around the world.”

Obama’s stance on open diplomacy with Iran is very controversial. Former Republican governor, Mike Huckabee, attacked Obama, saying that he will “continue to give madmen the benefit of the doubt. If he’s wrong just once, we will pay a heavy price. (McCain) will follow the fanatics to their caves in Pakistan or to the gates of hell...what Obama wants to do is give them a place setting on the table.”

Barack Obama proposes that if Iran abandons its nuclear program, and stops the training and harboring of terrorists, it will receive incentives. This includes a membership into the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and even normal diplomatic relations. Contrary to Huckabee’s statement, diplomacy has in fact been a policy carried out by two of the most famous Republican presidents. Ronald Reagan had open talks with the USSR, and Richard Nixon did the same with the People’s Republic of China. These were both communist countries, and these Republican presidents were carrying out diplomatic relations with them during the Cold War. Barack Obama is proposing that the same should be done during the War on Terror.

Comparisons between their foreign policies on the Iraq war are also illuminating. In his book Third Term, CNN political analyst Paul Begala referred to prewar legislation that John McCain voted against, which would have made President Bush more accountable for the planning of the Iraq war.

“John McCain voted against making Bush submit a report to Congress on pre-war intelligence. He voted against creating an independent commission to study pre-war intelligence. He voted against requiring Bush to report on his plans for post-conflict strategies in Iraq. McCain voted against making government open and accountable and transparent.”

Barack Obama was against the Iraq war to begin with. “I made a different judgment...I spoke out against what I called a ‘rash war in Iraq,’” Obama said, speaking to a crowd in Clinton, Iowa on September 12, 2007. “I worried about an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.’” It is obvious that Obama looks to be a careful planner, which includes being well-informed on the crisis at hand.

When asked about Bush’s proposal of being in Iraq for 50 years at a meeting in Concord, New Hampshire, McCain replied, “Make it a hundred.” On January 6, 2008, McCain went on with this line of thought when speaking on CBS’s Face the Nation. “I don’t think Americans are concerned if we’re there for one hundred years or one thousand years or ten thousand years.” He attacked Obama’s plan as cut and run, basically abandoning Iraq, and leaving it as a hub for terrorism.

Barack Obama really wants what he calls a “responsible removal” of US troops. “They cannot—and should not—bear the responsibilities for resolving the grievances at the heart of Iraq’s civil war.”

In a time when America is so deeply involved in the affairs of foreign politics—two wars and potentially a third in Iran— bipartisan policy will become increasingly important in terms of foreign policy.

As the election draws near, the American people are going to have to choose between the war and anti-war candidate. If the past two elections are any indicator, as well as the added baggage of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the war president, John McCain, is going to be much more appealing to the general public. But as political guru Adlai Stevenson once said, “People get the kind of government they deserve.”