July 28, 2008 - 10:40am
Opinion

Being Barack Obama

First, McCain adopted Obama's longstanding notion of sending at least three additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, even after McCain said for years that Iraq was the central battleground in the war on terror.

Now, McCain says that he thinks Obama's 16-month timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq is a "pretty good timetable."

Coming next week: McCain changes his position on the gas-tax holiday, calling it a "political gimmick."

ROB TORNOE can be reached via email at rob.tornoe@politicker.com.
Related topics: John McCain, Barack Obama

Comments

"willing to adjust to realities on the ground"


I realize that the McCain/Cullen team is in dire straits and their current bogus rhetoric is borne from utter desperation. Though I can understand their, well, lying, I cannot let it go unchallenged.

So when the NHGOP Chair parrots Senator McCain’s talking points:
“However, the fact that Barack Obama has clung to his demand for an unconditional withdrawal for so long as a pander to his liberal supporters makes you question whether he has the political courage and judgment to serve as Commander in Chief.”

The fact? Fact????

I remember a debate where Gov.Richardson and Sen.Dodd capitalized on the “fact” that Sen. Obama would not commit to a withdrawal date in order to “pander to his liberal supporters.” I remember being happily surprised as he repeatedly affirmed his commitment to re-engage al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. This was his position from the time he gained my support back in March of 2007. That much I can attest to.

But since we need to parse fact from fiction, I present this:
A Way Forward in Iraq
November 20, 2006

Chicago Council on Global Affairs
(Emphasis mine)
The American soldiers I met when I traveled to Iraq this year were performing their duties with bravery, with brilliance, and without question. They are doing so today. They have battled insurgents, secured cities, and maintained some semblance of order in Iraq. But even as they have carried out their responsibilities with excellence and valor, they have also told me that there is no military solution to this war. Our troops can help suppress the violence, but they cannot solve its root causes. And all the troops in the world won't be able to force Shia, Sunni, and Kurd to sit down at a table, resolve their differences, and forge a lasting peace.

I have long said that the only solution in Iraq is a political one. To reach such a solution, we must communicate clearly and effectively to the factions in Iraq that the days of asking, urging, and waiting for them to take control of their own country are coming to an end. No more coddling, no more equivocation. Our best hope for success is to use the tools we have - military, financial, diplomatic - to pressure the Iraqi leadership to finally come to a political agreement between the warring factions that can create some sense of stability in the country and bring this conflict under control.

The first part of this strategy begins by exerting the greatest leverage we have on the Iraqi government - a phased redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq on a timetable that would begin in four to six months.

When I first advocated steps along these lines over a year ago, I had hoped that this phased redeployment could begin by the end of 2006. Such a timetable may now need to begin in 2007, but begin it must. For only through this phased redeployment can we send a clear message to the Iraqi factions that the U.S. is not going to hold together this country indefinitely - that it will be up to them to form a viable government that can effectively run and secure Iraq.

Let me be more specific. The President should announce to the Iraqi people that our policy will include a gradual and substantial reduction in U.S. forces. He should then work with our military commanders to map out the best plan for such a redeployment and determine precise levels and dates. When possible, this should be done in consultation with the Iraqi government - but it should not depend on Iraqi approval.

I am not suggesting that this timetable be overly-rigid. We cannot compromise the safety of our troops, and we should be willing to adjust to realities on the ground. The redeployment could be temporarily suspended if the parties in Iraq reach an effective political arrangement that stabilizes the situation and they offer us a clear and compelling rationale for maintaining certain troop levels. Moreover, it could be suspended if at any point U.S. commanders believe that a further reduction would put American troops in danger.

07/28/08 8:29 pm

Change


I for one would just like to hear from John McCain, or Fergus Cullen, or John Sununu, or Jeb Bradley or someone, about what kind of CHANGE we can expect in the next four years with the election of Republicans.

I only hear that our future will be more-of-the-same. More deaths in Iraq, no greater availability for "...the rest of us..." (i.e. those of us who can't afford health insurance) of health care, more corporate welfare, more reliance on oil companies and their drilling.

So, what WILL change? Just tell us. Lower taxes for the wealthy and those corporate giants? Fewer environmental protections? More money for war?

A curious mind would like to know.

07/28/08 8:37 pm

Being Barak


One thing is for sure, you gotta' love the non-partisan humor! WANT CHANGE? VOTE DEMOCRAT!!

08/06/08 2:18 pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote> <b> <i> <p> <br> <span> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
Please enter the characters exactly as they appear below.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.