The contortionist Iraq politics of "kneepads" McCain
McCain staked out the "more troops" position awhile back thinking it was politically strong, would never happen, and allowed him to explain his previous support for the war.
Now, hidden in the holiday weekend, he adds a brilliant new wrinkle.
If we win, "I was all for more troops, I told you it would work," but if we lose, "I would never have sent the troops in. It was immoral."
(By the way, I am unilaterally imposing the nickname "kneepads" on McCain after watching him get down on his knees to court the same people who knifed him in 2000.)
Now, hidden in the holiday weekend, he adds a brilliant new wrinkle.
"I believe victory is still attainable," the Arizona Republican says. "But without additional combat forces we will not win this war."
"It would be immoral, and I could not do it," the former Vietnam prisoner of war added.
If we win, "I was all for more troops, I told you it would work," but if we lose, "I would never have sent the troops in. It was immoral."
(By the way, I am unilaterally imposing the nickname "kneepads" on McCain after watching him get down on his knees to court the same people who knifed him in 2000.)
4 Comments:
First, the man's son is in boot camp now, to become a United States Marine. I'm not sure what MOS the son will follow, whether it is in combat arms, but that does not matter much. His son is going to be going to Iraq within 21 - 24 months (at the latest).
McCain has asserted "more troops" for some time, I think at least a year. With the present situation, "more troops" are required for a very long period of time, at least an Army rotation. That is not workable, as retired general MacCaffrey has said. What you miss is that McCain is calling for a withdrawal if America can't stomach a draft, or an extensive use of the Guard (perhaps as painful as a draft).
By Bravo 2-1, at 3:45 PM
Okay, I know his son is in Marine training, but that doesn't excuse him from his obvious politicking. He's playing his position for presidential ambition, and that's not kosher with me.
And, yes, he has called for more troops for a year, but he's been running for president since that mid 2004 embrace with Bush. In January of this year, the White House gave McCain their donor's list. He's their candidate.
(Just personally, I don't think 20,000 makes a significant difference so long as they are limited under the same strictures now in effect. If they can't go into Sadr City without permission from the government allowing a warning to the targets, if they have to continually release high value targets due to political pressure, I don't see how 20,000 troops makes that big of a difference other than squeezing the violence into other areas. Even if they were all combat troops, and all put in Baghdad combined with the 8-13,000 there, you're still below the 10-1 counterinsurgency level. I think it will just reinforce the view of the US as occupier.)
ANd, I know that's what McCain is saying, but I'm reading it through a political lens, and what I read is postioning for either contingency for his campaign. If we win he was for it, if we lose, he can say he was "morally opposed."
I'm sorry to disagree, but McCain is running for president above everything else right now. After watching him claim political victory on the detainee torture bill when in reality he gave them everything they wanted, after watching him go to the religious right and flip positions that he's held for 20 years, I just don't believe that his Iraq position is anything but politics.
Just my opinion.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 5:55 PM
Other people are getting your vibe.
By sumo, at 1:09 AM
I've just had enough of "the maverick."
Mike
By mikevotes, at 8:59 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home