Obama's Iraq Trip Changes McCain's Position On Iraq

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jul 22, 2008 at 11:30


On July 4th, the supposed success of the troop escalation meant, according to the McCain campaign, that we have to stay in Iraq:

John McCain's position that we cannot risk the progress we have made in Iraq by beginning to withdraw our troops immediately without concern for conditions on the ground."

By July 21st, the supposed success of the troop escalation meant, according to the McCain campaign, that troops will come home:

McCain said U.S. military success had made it possible for troops to return. "When you win wars, troops come home. And we are winning," he said.

McCain promised that Obama's position on Iraq would change after he visited the country. Instead, it appears that McCain's position has changed. Maybe this is like one of those Republicans who mercilessly attack homosexuals, and then are discovered to visit gay prostitutes, or prey on underage pages, on a regular basis.
Chris Bowers :: Obama's Iraq Trip Changes McCain's Position On Iraq
Now, promising withdrawal in two years because the surge is a success despite, seventeen days earlier, declaring that withdrawal would be a bad idea because the surge is a success, is somehow not a contradiction because McCain will not do anything without considering conditions on the ground:

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said the senator's comments did not reflect a shift in position.

"The two years in his answer today is consistent with his position that we can begin to responsibly discuss the reduction of troop levels in Iraq as long as they are based on maintaining the security and stability of the gains we made," Bounds said.

So, as long as you say that you will consider conditions on the ground, it is apparently acceptable to imply that your Iraq position is all things to all people. It is both Iraq forever, and withdrawal in two years.

The best part is that the McCain campaign is actually accusing Obama of doing whatever the politics demand in Iraq:

Today, we released a new video documentary entitled "The Obama Iraq Documentary: Whatever the Politics Demand."

So, somehow, Obama is bad for Iraq because he will do "whatever the politics demand" on Iraq, but he won't take conditions on the ground into consideration. That makes sense.

FYI to the McCain campaign: if you are going to both promise withdrawal and staying in Iraq forever, don't criticize your opponent for both being too obstinate and too stubborn on Iraq. Offering both a contradictory message and a contradictory attack might make people think that you are just doing whatever the politics demand, or something.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Obama's Iraq Trip Changes McCain's Position On Iraq | 8 comments
I am not everybody. (4.00 / 2)
Over the years I have figured out that my perceptions are often not shared by the larger public. It seems to me that the McCain position is self-contradictory to the point of appearing truly insane. I wish I could feel confident that this  perspective is shared by the broader population of non-DFH's. The alternate universe of corporate media punditry has me befuddled.

miasmo.com
McCain is becoming a punchline (4.00 / 1)
even Republicans I argue with are hesitant to defend McCain, if they do at all.  I don't think there has been another candidate in my lifetime this ill-equipped for a national campaign.

At this rate he'll be lucky to be re-elected to the Senate in 2010.

John McCain.  Wrong for America.

McCain has nothing but his bio (4.00 / 3)
And he's getting older every day.

Watching Obama do his press conference in Jordan was interesting, even without being able to hear the questions.  He constantly rejected the premise of the evidently rather tired questions and answered them with common sense.  "You seem to think that if I don't do exactly what General Petraeus wants, I'm not listening to him.  No.  I will factor in what he says, but as President I have a wider framework and responsibility."  Or words to that effect.

McCain is really in a box. He wants to stay in Iraq indefrinitely as part of an American imperial presence in the ME, but he really can't put it that way because there is so little support for that position.  It is increasingly obvious that the Iraqis don't want us to stay and neither do the American people.  If Obama (and al-Maliki) say it enough times, then it becomes ok for more people to agree, and so the consensus changes.  Who wants us to stay in Iraq just to be there for more wars?  McCain and the neocons.  That's a pretty small base.

And once the conversation gets off foreign affairs, McCain really, really has nothing to offer.  And people are seeing that as the campaign wears on.  The debates are going to be the final nail in McCain's coffin.

I do have to say, however, that I'm troubled with the desire for more war in Afghansitan.  Obama is doing a good job of turning the GOP rhetoric on terror and pivoting toward Afghanistan as a way out of Iraq, but I think the "surge" strategy is even less likely to work there, and a land war in Afghanistan is just as bad as a land war in Iraq.  He has to understand the limited nature of what we can accomplish there, and the necessity of using means other than military force.  And although he properly recognizes Pakistan as the key, and the need to give Pakistan some more security on the Indian side of their country to get them less interested in the Afghanistan side, the problem of Muslin extemism in Pakistan and Afghansitan and the tribal issues are pretty complicated.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

even better, contrast McCain's new position (4.00 / 2)
taken just yesterday, with his closing line in the Op-Ed he submitted but got back with revision notes because he didn't do his homework correctly:

July 21:

"As I've said, we have succeeded. This strategy is not (just) succeeding, we have succeeded. And of course as we all know it has to be based on conditions on the ground."

McCain said U.S. military success had made it possible for troops to return. "When you win wars, troops come home. And we are winning," he said.

written sometime last week, reported July 21:

"Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the "Mission Accomplished" banner prematurely."

McCain desperate -- just 5 minutes ago, essentially ... (4.00 / 1)
accused Obama of treason.  McCain said that he would rather win a war if it meant losing elected office, whereas Obama would rather lose a war if it meant that he could be elected.  How can he get away with that kind of attack?

John McCain won't insure children
Obstinate and stubborn? (0.00 / 0)
Um, those two words meant the same thing back when I went to school.
Surveys on Iraq (0.00 / 0)
Glenn Greenwald (Glennzilla as some bloggers know him) covered a whole bunch of surveys on the public's view of Iraq within the last month or so. The public does NOT see any position as coherently being both calendar-based and conditions-based. The survey questions all presumed that these were mutually exclusive and contradictory positions.
Either the 3rd Division leaves Mosul because it's February or because military people on the ground have certified it as appropriate to leave.
McCain is of course trying to have it both ways at once by saying he supports both a calendar-based withdrawal and a conditions-based withdrawal.  
Withdawal conditioned by the calendar? (0.00 / 0)
McCain's whole argument only works on a bumper sticker.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Obama's Iraq Trip Changes McCain's Position On Iraq | 8 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox