If Iraqis want U.S. troops to leave, what will McCain say?
Now that a growing number of top Iraqi officials are talking openly about a timeline for U.S. troop withdrawal, it's worth taking a moment to consider how this might factor into John McCain’s vision of an indefinite war, followed by an indefinite troop presence.
As luck would have it, McCain was asked about this kind of scenario at the Council of Foreign Relations in 2004, and gave a very straightforward answer.
Question: “What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there?”
McCain’s Answer: “Well, if that scenario evolves than I think it’s obvious that we would have to leave because — if it was an elected government of Iraq, and we’ve been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government then I think we would have other challenges, but I don’t see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.” [emphasis added]
Adam Blickstein asked, “Does the John McCain of 2008 agree with this assessment?” Sounds like the kind of question an enterprising political reporter might pose to the Republican candidate.
"My friendshhhh.... itsshh time for regime change in Iraq"... that's what he will say.
if he thinks the REAL thrust of our "policy" in/toward Iraq has been to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis, he needs to change what he's smoking,.
Sounds like the kind of question an enterprising political reporter might pose to the Republican candidate.
Too bad McCain is screening out questions from "enterprising political reporters."
"the kind of question an enterprising political reporter"
... hmmm the elders have spoken of such things ...
I don't want the country to be run by a senile old man who glorifies the military and warfare.
Since Iraq is McCain's only hope in his flailing GOP campaign, it should be interesting to see how his people spin this--clearly, he is intellectually incapable of formulating an idea that would not make him look like the Republican idiot he is. Looks like Iraq is on the side of 70% of Americans who want us out of Iraq.
If they want us out, why would we stay?
Uh.
BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Nixxon/Mobil, uh . . . uh . . . uh . . . uh
If being capture and being tortured for 5+ years qualifies McCain to be president, then there are more than 250 current and former Gitmo detainee who are qualified to be the next Afgan president.
earl @ 4:
Let us consult with the ancient text to find knowledge of such bravery.
It could get really sticky when the UN mandate ends. We think that, in order to get elected, the Repubs will actually withdraw some troops right before the election. If, of course, we actually have an election. I still think that this years' October Surprise is some event that will effectively call it off. --MaryK
“Does the John McCain of 2008 agree with this assessment?” Sounds like the kind of question an enterprising political reporter might pose to the Republican candidate.
Very funny. Of course McCain should be asked this, but you can't expect the press to ask him this because it's too OBVIOUS. They would rather ask him if he prefers hot dogs or hamburgers on the 4th of July. That kind of insightful question shows more of what his character is about just like when the press said Bush was the person you would rather have a beer with.
Very, very insightful stuff. Silly non press people don't know what it is they actually do.
No. 44 @ 5:
Too late now, a very large portion of the country's economy depends on military and warfare.
http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC20/Chapman.htm
The majority of Americans want the troops out of Iraq.
The majority of Iraqis want the troops out of Iraq.
The majority of THE REST OF THE WORLD want the troops out of Iraq.
Why is this not a no-brainer for anyone inside the beltway?
I'm sure someone's going to ask Grampy this kind of question.
When pigs fly.
Of course, he left himself a back door out of it (a "good" politician always does). You'll notice he said "If it is an extremist government, then we'll have other challenges to face". In other words, he will simply state that the Makili government is extremist, probably tie it to Iran and then declare that they will stay there until their government is no longer "extremist" (read: until their government is of OUR choosing).
I see a problem here. MsBush is flip flopping every day but the media has been on the Obama trail about Obama’s change of stance on issues. I think that Obama’s people have got to get on the stick concerning McShame’s flip flops. If the MSM don’t start reporting all his flip flops then Obama has to run an ad. One flip flop after another. Run the ads over and over again. Get the retards out in middle America talking about it. Make them bitter about McGramp's flip flopping lying.
marykmusic @ 10:
Gotta say I'm with MaryK on that one. They'll either hijack the election like the last time or declare martial law after allowing another terrist attack. Can't have Dickie and Georgie face the music or anything like that.
McPOW is also talking up his worthless Vietnam record. Let’s show how much a shitty military record counts. Let’s show a picture of McPOW along with a photo of his BBF (Best Friend Forever) Bush in Bush’s National Guard getup. This would show Joe Sixpack and Betty Winebox what military experience has got us in the last 7 years.
The answer my friends is to Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran then just shift the troops over a few 100 miles and there you go , do your best to stretch the oil war out to a 100 or so years. And the best part is we get out of Iraq which everybody said they wanted , Right ?
I don't know what McCain would say now. It'll probably be the same answer he gave a lady at a town hall meeting the other day when she asked him what he would do about social security. He said he would reach across the aisle and he would fix it.
How's that for details?
I'm guessing McCain will say he will wait to hear from General Petraeus. Whatever he says he will begin his comment by saying, It's time for a little straight talk here, my friends. And he will end it by repeating his final sentence twice.
If anybody has a few minutes, this is a great article on the Military Economy,
but really cleacut and easy to grasp.
heres one quote:
"By 1990 the value of the weapons, equipment and factories devoted to the Department of Defense was 83% of the value of all plants and equipment in US manufacturing. From 1947 to 1990, the combined US military budgets amounted to $8.7 trillion. Even though the Soviet Union no longer exists, US reliance on military Keynesianism has, if anything, ratcheted up, thanks to the massive vested interests that have become entrenched around the military establishment. Over time, a commitment to both guns and butter has proven an unstable configuration. Military industries crowd out the civilian economy and lead to severe economic weaknesses. Devotion to military Keynesianism is a form of slow economic suicide."
http://mondediplo.com/2008/02/05military
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 18:
Don't forget his U.S.S. Forrestal involvement, because it's generally accepted that he caused that disaster (140+ Navy men killed) by wet-starting his fighter which caused the flame to hit the underside of the jet behind him... It was recently passed on to me that a former aircraft mechanic on the ship McScrewup was IMMEDIATELY evacuated to (the only non-injured evacuee) remembers that his aircraft was sabotaged and that's the REAL reason it went down over N.Vietnam. It was a getback that wasn't quite successful.
It is high time we take back this nation. When gw and that DICK gave orders to invade and destroy Iraq, they NEVER intended to leave... EVER. I for one am sick and tired to living under the same flag as these killers. It is either US or THEM, and frankly, I am not feeling up to relocating. NO MORE WARMONGERS!
How about:
but, but, but . . the surge is working !
or
they're just not in touch with 'conditions on the ground'.
or
it's definitely in the best interest of the United States to remain in Iraq for as long as we can keep borrowing money to finance it.
tjb @ 19:
After Iran did their missile testing, you are probably closer to being right than you want to be.
Spin, lie and deny.
Its all republicans can do.
It doesn't matter what he says or does at this point. The media doesn't report it, and the Democrats aren't hitting him hard on it. He has said so many ridiculous things and changed so many positions, he should be sent to a mental institution. The guy is sick. The recent joke on killing the entire Iranian population is yet another proof.
And YET, he's treated by the general public as a "hero" and still has a reasonable chance to win. If he wins, to quote the great George Carlin, then this country is finished.
The occupation will carry on for many years to come.
Just like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will carry on for many more years to come.
Why ? :
1) There is more money to be made while the fires rage.
2) Peace is hard work.
3) War is easy. ( and very profitable )
Imperfect Solution ( Yes, I have one for ya ) :
Hand over the reins of leadership to women.
Seriously.
Mankind needs a pardigm shift right about now.
Anyone who is so intimately ( internally ) connected to the process of giving birth would have a strong reluctance to the use of deadly force as diplomacy.
Military conflict never brings about equitable outcomes.
To the "winner" go the spoils and all that.
I, for one, would welcome my new Estrogen laden Overlords.
I am preparing to submit at this very moment.
Peace.
It'll be tough to ask that question from the back of the plane. And I don't like sprinkles, either.
It would be very interesting to put the question to Mccain - I suspect his memory isn't what it used to be so he'd have to be reminded of his earlier answer...
Here comes one of my stupid questions. I know they will have an election in Iraq in the fall, but I don't know if Maliki will be up for reelection. If he is, what are the chances of him being reelected, if our government's hands are still the mix?
More importantly what is the Pentagon saying?
Evidently the Pentagon is going to play "ref" to the Iraqis regarding if and when Iraqi "security situation" is in bounds or out of bounds. An American Army General involved with Iraqi Army "training" now claiming the Iraiqis are "not ready to do full security" anytime in "forseeable" future.
So...Iraq may be a sovereign nation and have an "elected" government but in the Pentagon that does not permit Iraqis to tell Americans to leave.
That is up to the Pentagon.
Which of course is where Bush/Cheney regime will punt on Iraqi statements about Iraq being free of Americans.
To the question of if Americans will leave Iraq if asked to do so by Iraqis one can safely conclude that is not going to happen if the Americans can do anything about it.
Americans are in Iraq not at the request or pleasure of Iraq.
Americans are in Iraq to set a long term template for oil biz and ME American militarism.
The Iraqis will have to get much more agitated to undo any of this surely enough.
Duh! I can't believe the press is getting all worked up about this. IF it ever looked like the Iraqi's might kick us out, it would be the PERFECT opportunity for war-defenders to say that Iraq asking us to leave MEANS its time to go and will claim we've won.
pissed off patricia @ 31:
In other words, has Cheney decided to put a cap in his ass ?
MCCAIN: "My dear friends, what I will do is to give prime minister Malki a tour in our 'Straight Talk Express' bus and then I'll see what he says..".
What would McOld say to the Iraqis? He would call them defeatacrats.
The majority of military family and friends want the troops out of Iraq as well, but McCranky is not prone to listen to them either, not with "surge" envy and recurring senility moments.
biff diggerence @ 34:
Well, not exactly. I was thinking more along the lines of rigged elections. They have mastered the deed here so I shouldn't think it would be a problem to do it there.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 18:
His Vietnam record? You mean that fact that he surrendered to the enemy and freely and willingly made propaganda tapes for the enemy? You mean THAT record?
if the democrats beat mccain in november and our new president decides 16 months is not enough time to start withdrawing any troops from iraq does that mean that its our war now and weve become the agressors? say it aint so!
swampfox @ 40:
When Obama wins in November and take over in January, the last 8 years of failures and destruction by herr dubyah will not exist. As far as the reich-wing will be concerned, we went from Clinton to Obama and any problems that happen under Obama's watch were his fault or Clinton's fault,
swampfox @ 40:
It's already our war now. We are the aggressors. Future events won't change that.
No. 44 @ 5:
Been living in a cave for the last 40 years? with the exception of 4 years of Jimmy Carter and 8 or BC, that is the American political experience.
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 39:
And the Million $$$$ jet he crashed. Did they make him pay for it like they made the Iraq veterans pay for their armor when they got shot and had to be medivac-ed out?
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 41:
oh!ok they had me worried for awhile, so we can blame our continuied agression on bill, thank god !i was afraid we couldnt come up with an alibi for keeping troops in iraq,
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 44:
Not ONE aircraft, but FIVE!
McGrampa's military accomplishments: destroying 5 military aircraft, surrendering to the enemy, finishing 894 out 899 at the Naval Academy, and willingly filming propaganda films for the enemy.
Rinse. Rather. Repeat.
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 46:
Oh my. That can be expensive! Bitterly expensive.
A man called in to Washington Journal (c-span) this morning. He said he was a repub but wanted everyone to vote for Senator Obama so the dems would have to take the blame for the future of our country.
That's the kind of thinking that's out there.
pissed off patricia @ 48:
Sadly, that makes perfect sense to the reich-wingers.
pissed off patricia @ 48:
frightening isnt it?
firedoglake and emptywheel's websites are down here in Mi with Charter internet access. Anyone else having a problem?
sunshine @ 51:
No problem. I have comcast
This whole issue is so much bullsh*t.
Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb, The media is pumping out so much hype about its "possibilities" that they are completely losing site of a much bigger problem for the world,
That would be Pakistan. Pakistan has and is allowing both Al qaeda and the Taliban safe haven in the Waziristan region. Pakistans government is totally unstable right now, they killed the one leader who might have gotten people together .... And most importantly ...
They have Nuclear Bombs AND a delivery system.
McCain Dismisses Iraqi Idea of Troop Withdrawal
McCain'll probably say that the Iraqis are buying yellow cake from Nigeria and aluminum tubes from the French and if we don't want to see mushroom clouds over Peoria we'll have to stay for another 200 years.
☻..Bangkok Bob..☻ @ 53:
McGramps is bowing his chest with the latest news about Iran's missile test. The MSM is panting with fear and pimping McGramps as the strong hawk that can handle this "deadly threat". McGramps is actually upset that another country is making "progress" (his wording).
Just imagine if a hostile invading army was your neighbor. Reich-wingers are indeed myopic.
☻..Bangkok Bob..☻ @ 53:
Oop, sorry ... wrong issue.
blueTexas @ 3 beat me to the punch.
Radically Moderate @ 9:
FIFY
I want to see how the Double Talk Express worms his way out of this one.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 18, shouldn't that be McDesertedthePOWs?
SFnomad @ 60:
He'll 1) Flip-flop, or 2) Deny it
pissed off patricia @ 48:
And these assholes swear that progressives hate America.
McLobbyists'BestFriendForever will have to check with his handlers in the boosh crime family.
Why isn't someone saying what the reality actually is? We cannot afford to leave. We are stuck there for longer than anticipated. Bush went in illegally and set the stage with absolutely no idea of the outcome. The oil at this point in time is our lifesblood. Can we take the risk that the Iranians will not carry out their threat to bottle up the Straits of Hormuz to prevent oil tankers from delivery? Requiring that delivery also requires our presence there to prevent this from happening to some degree. If Israel carries out their threat to bomb Iran, which has been strongly suggested is quite possible, what happens if that conflagration takes place? We are stuck there and anyone who tells you differently is either outright lying or has no conception of the depths of the issues. This is no longer about "liberating" the Iraqis it is about the oil.
From the link Janet provided at comment 54
"“Prime Minister Malki, is, has got his, he is a leader of a country,’’ Mr. McCain said, according to a pool report. “And I am confident that he will act, as the president and foreign minister have both told me in the last several days, that it will be directly related to the situation on the ground, just as they have always said. And since we are succeeding and then I am convinced, as I have said before, we can withdraw and withdraw with honor, not according to a set timetable. And I’m confident that is what Prime Minister Maliki is talking about since he has told me that for the many meetings we have had.”
Asked if he thought Mr. Maliki was aiming his statements at a domestic political audience, Mr. McCain said: “I don’t know. Ask him.’’
First, I'm not sure what McCain said but he sounds testy there at the end.
pissed off patricia @ 31, that's actuall quite an astute question. Could very well be that's what Maliki is looking at and realises standing up against the illegal occupation will increase his chances for re-election.
"I'd listen to the commanders on the ground." -Bush, Obama, McCain.
PJ @ 65:
It has NEVER been about liberating anyone.......except form their oil and their treasure.
Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Oh, this is rich. Do we really have to ask what McSame's answer will be? My guess is that it will be very similar to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHhZF66C1Dc
though rest assured the reasons McSame gives won't be stated quite as honestly as that!
Johnny2Bad @ 68:
and Hillary
Left&Left @ 63:
And, that's likely one reason why the Republican Party went ahead and allowed McCain to be their candidate. He gets to live out his life-long ambition to run for/be president (just to shoe Daddy who's boss), and the repugs get to dump the whole world mess on the Dems (but, honestly the Dems have sure helped to create a lot of it).
I still think they let him be their candidate because Cheney is not planning on having an election or leaving office - those sabers are still rattling.
If McCain gets elected we will not be leaving Iraq anytime soon. We will need the air space and fields for the coming war with Iran. The Saudis and Turkey will not let us use their air space or bases for bombing runs on Iran. We will need more then a few air craft carriers in the gulf for the war. We will need land bases and that is were Iraq comes in.
PJ @ 65:
if this happens the mid east will become an excellent graveyard for americas sons and daughters, and its all for gasoline, oh wait if we brought all these guys home we have no place to store them so they will have to be discharged then the inemployment rate will increase, that wont look so good since the job markets drying up,
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 18:
Hey. A stay at the Hanoi Hilton is not a "worthless Vietnam record".
Whatever you think of him (and politically its a joke), Swiftboating is a coward's move.
Yeah. You.
sorry unemployment rate!
Amitola @ 69:
From day 1 the Left has been saying this war was about oil. Oil and gas prices are at record highs and the oil companies are making record profits....once again, the Left is proven correct.
Johnny2Bad @ 75:
McGramps surrendered to the enemy, only spent a brief time in "Hanoi Hilton" and was given preferential treatment the rest of the time, crashed 5 military aircraft, and willingly made propaganda films for the enemy.
Whatever you think of him, don't attempt to make him out to be hero or brave. Not knowing the truth about McGrampa is a coward's move.
Yeah. You.
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 77:
and all were offering is more of the same!
{ Deleted,Flamebaiting. SiteMonitor}
Johnny2Bad @ 68:
OK Johnny, you're right. All three of these men are the same.
swampfox @ 79:
When the entire [reich-wing] MSM goes out of their way to support McGRamps and the GOPigs, our hands are practically tied.
{ Deleted, Flamebaiting. SiteMonitor}
Johnny2Bad @ 75:
Morning Johnny, I have to disagree with you on this. When McCain signed that anti American propoganda, he sealed his own fate. Now, I know we're not supposed to talk about that. But I have to ask Why? If that was a dem, they would have never made it to a job in politics at all. And yet no one has brought up this part of his military record. I wish some one would ask," Did you or did you not sign anti American propaganda when you were being held a POW? He's the one running on his military record. So it should be fair game.
PJ @ 65:
I like to sum up the Iran Problem like this:
Same lies different country.
Same morons believing the same lines of bullshit.
Get the drift.
mudshark @ 84:
McGramps despicable behavior as a POW has been completely silenced as we run up to November. By this time 4 years ago, the SmearBoats were given unlimited coverage on Faux, MSNBC, and CNN. At one point when Buchanan took over for Scarborough for a few weeks, Buchanan spent every evening quoting the SmearBoats as facts and gave them unprecedented coverage. Where is the outrage over McGramps behavior as a POW and willingness to surrender to the enemy?
Christ! With the way Obama has been going its becoming clearer and clearer that McInsane is actually going to win!! I actually felt a chill as I wrote that just now! He's going to win! I don't know who's more insane.... McInsane himself or the nutcases that will actually vote for him! I haven't been to the US in the last decade...not once! Its clear it'll be another decade before I'll ever set foot on US soil again. Sad...so sad.
No matter what either side tells you in order to gain your vote, we are not leaving Iraq any time soon. Get used to it. There may be a reduction in combat troops but our presence is going to remain there for years to come.
The winner in all this? Osama bin Laden. He predicted our economic implosion and that is where we are heading. Those oil fields keep our economy running. Without the oil we collapse. How many airlines are cutting back service as we speak because of the cost? Food supplies are dwindling due to reliance on ethanol as an alternative. Oil and heating costs will become unsustainable to the average worker. Driving will become a luxury at 10.00 a gallon. He simply needs to sit there and watch. Bush did this but the way out is untenable because of our need and dependency. Neither politician can promise you what you want to hear. It is not possible at this juncture. They hate us over there and their aim to defeat us is not so much through military engagements as it is in denying us the one thing they have: oil.
We stuck our hand into a beehive and the solution is how we remove it without further damage. We need to take the blinders off and face the reality. Sad as it is.
McCain will say "we'll leave in a hundred years, bitches! Haven't you been paying attention?"
Pishposh and himham. Any Iraqi government that is against having a permanent US troop presence is by definition "extremist" and Grampa would have no hesitation staying on. The locals would really love us then, the flowers would rain on our troops 'til the streets ran red with flower petals...
Personally I don’t think it is a good idea to smear McPOW. On the other hand if McPOW is going to run on his POW record then it should be pointed out, as Wes Clarke did, that being a POW is in no way a qualification to be POTUS. It really is just that simple. Bringing up what he was forced to do while being a POW is nowhere!! Who, in that position, would not have done anything to make it better? No, the only point that needs to be made is that being a POW is not a qualification to be President. And being a POW is the sum of McPOW’s record in Vietnam. That and crashing a few jets.
How about bringing up his place in his graduating class? 494 out of 498? Compare it to Bush's place. Compare it to Wes Clarke's place (1st at West Point?).
If you believe that McCain signed all those confessions and made all those anti- American films in order to avoid torture, WHY would McCain endorse torturing detainees at Git'mo if he KNOWS (from experience) that the information you get from tortured prisoners is unreliable? Or could it be that he's just a sadistic old fart that gets off on the thought of torture?
tjb @ 19:
That was the joke right ... we'll be happy to leave Iraq ... thru Iran.
PJ @ 65:
We are not stuck there. If the situation in Iraq is so unstable that it requires a foreign force to stablize things, it is the UN and its good offices and forces that must provide that stability. Our presence is only making things worse worse. Second, Iraqi oil is not a factor in our immediate or future energy security. Our supplies come mostly from Canada and Venezuela, with additional sourcing from Nigeria and sub-Saharan Africa.
Additionally, the emergence and growth of home-grown biodeisel is rapidly becoming an ever more significant source to offset foreign imports. We have the capability to supply 100 % of the ~120 billion gallons of deisel and ~80 billion gallons of heating oil that are used every year in the US. Currently, according to a study by Cornell, we could produce 43 billion gallons per year without putting any more idle farmlands into production. The Iraqi oil isn't about the nation's energy security, it's about profits for the oil companies and it equally about the oil companies maintaining hegemony over energy supplies. the oil companies loath the idea that 100% of the nation's deisel, heating oil and even #2 fuel oil used for combustion turbine generated electricity could be supplied without any participation by the oil companies. Their monopoly on a centrally supplied resource that they control gives them economic and political power which is what this is all about. Only the insane would argue that you give yourself security by invading an innocent country in order to steal their resources. Greed makes people insane.
mudshark @ 84:
Morning....I think it stinks...Kerry or McCain. Unlike Bush...These guys both served honorably. Its usually those who never served who are the ones barking the loudest over "military records".
Look, there's plenty to go after McCain on. Swiftboat(ing) is a verb now for a reason. Its despicable politics.
Further...never question what a person does due to torture. You'll never know what you'd do unless you were faced with it.
Sorry, but IMO going after McCain's or Kerry's or Webb's military record is C.S.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 91:
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 92:
Calling him "McPOW" is Swiftboating.
Calling him on his place in his class isn't.
What if, right before the election, we announce the war over, we have triumphed and liberated Iraq, there are large troop drawdowns ( even just to earlier levels?), and the media is wall-to-wall with images of happy soldiers being reunited with families, the Repugs touting proof that Bush's long, hard war has resulted in amazing success and a new democracy, (sure, there are a few bombs still going off over there, but isn't there always?) and then all the dittohead morons that think Barack is a muslim head into the voting booth... Who wins the election? Unless Iraq erupts into full-scale war overnight, and the images of happy soldiers in main street parades turn to horrendous carnage of little babies in Iraq (and that's never meant anything to people in the past-- only US soldier deaths count, remember?), then McCain is probably our next president. If Obama's "I told you so about the war" angle is taken away, what's he left with?
Paul @ 95:
Maybe I am dense but this is the first time I have ever heard of this rationale.
LEAVE? Huh? Not so fast.
Shouldn’t we pull about $900 Billion of oil from under the sand that we just freed BEFORE we leave Iraq? At $150/barrel, that's 6 Billion barrels we are owed and paid for in advance.
Seems we should get something more than a hanging video of Sadaam after watching friends die there, spending all USA’s money there.
Fox News can use this: This idea makes total sense. We freed the Iraqi people. We made their country free from dictators. We showed the muslim world how democracy and "Bush's freedom thing" works. All on our dime. The only thing left is to show them Bush & Co's version of capitalism now, and take what we're owed.
Lets take the oil before we leave. WE BOUGHT IT!
Why not? Everyone who voted for this administration has already left a lasting impression on the world, so adding oil grab to bombing innocents, collateral damage (oops killing innocents, but that's acceptable since this is a WAR), torture, occupation... what's a little theft to get some of our money back.
McCain should never even be allowed to see the " biggest trigger " in the world , leave alone be in charge of it .
Lindsey Williams says , Iran could hurt us far worse if they increased their oil output and sold in euros , it would in affect crash our dollar futher .
Reporters "earning seats" on McCain's so-called "Straight Talk Express" certainly aren't going to risk their seats asking him the question, and the rest of them aren't getting access to him, right?
They want us out, get out immediately.
Johnny2Bad @ 97:
This is crazy. If McPOW is running ads that show him as a POW he is running on being a POW. Fine. Calling him McPOW is not swiftboating in the least. “McPOW” says nothing. It is a name. If I was to say that McPOW gave away secrets while being a POW now that would be swiftboating and I don’t think his record AS a POW should be exploited. If McPOW brings up his record as a POW then it can and should be said the being a POW is not a qualification. Period. As Wes Clarke pointed out.
MyNeckAintRed @ 100:
You probably meant this as a satire but I'm afraid this is what hits the nail straight on the head. Wether they preach it to Fox News audiences or not, this is the rationale the US corporations work on. They went in to get the oil and they won't move until they have it, one way or the other. Iraq is meant to become a sort of colony and the US won't accept anything less - when apart from selling arms they have no other means of (future) income left.
The USA are almost bankrupt, they cannot let the booty slip.
Johnny2Bad @ 97:
Swiftboating requires lying, at least in my opinion. Since McCain actually was a POW (as he reminds us incessantly) then calling him "McPOW" isn't Swiftboating.
Pretty sad when the puppet government an empire has installed insists on the occupying militia leave...*sigh*... those billions of dollars wasted on securing oil would have been better spent on inventing a future based on solar and wind energy.
David N @ 101:
Frankly I would wish Iran would do exactly that because I still believe the only chance to stop the USA from causing further terror is if they go completely bankrupt.
But this is what Saddam Hussein did - changing from dollar to euro - and look what it got him. The minute he did it he was doomed.
As little as I like Ahmadinejad I can not but admire his tight rope walk. He knows he has this option but leaves it untouched. Showing some 'military muscle' these days is almost brillant when neither the USA nor Israel feel comfortable with an enemy that would strike back. Israel can only shoot Palestinian sqatters who have nothing but medieval rockets and the US is only strong when it bombs either from above or goes hunting for civilians on weddings and market places. Jeez, they knew exactly there were no WMD in Iraq after starving the country ten years with sanctions, that was what made them so keen in the first place.
My fear is however that someone loses nerve and either US or Israel launches a nuclear strike, turning Tehran into Hiroshima.
If conditions on the ground are great, according to the Republicans and the McCain campaign, due to the surge that McCain supported, and Iraqi troops are being trained and taking more and more control, then why can't the soldiers come home now? They say it is determined by conditions on the ground, but according to them, conditions on the ground are getting better all the time so that means our troops should be able to start coming home now right?
This double-talk by the McCain people and the Republican Party as a whole should be called out for what it is, but it seems that neither the "liberal media" or the Democrats are willing to do that for fear of alienating voters whose vote is determined by soundbites.
They didn't do anything to us. We destroyed their country and killed their citizens. Get out and leave tham alone.
Silly you, you posed your question as if the "main stream media" actually has an enterprising political reporter. We all know too well that they are all trying to earn a spot in the VIP seats aboard Air McCorrupt, sometimes referred to as the straing talk express.
RMHK @ 110:
My take on this is , the best way to prove to the world that it was this admin. that caused all of this carnage would be to ,
1) cease fire yesterday
2) supply complete aid without being asked to do so
3) clean the enviroment of all DU and other muntions
4) help rebuild their country , which I would help do
5) bring to trial those that made this happen
Instead of a war effort , I vote for a peace effort and not just Iraq , but all of the other nations we are in . There might be another up side , we might be able to build products like solar and wind generating plants , more farm eqt. ( need to get away the GM seeds though ) water distilling plants , housing both portable and affordable , medical training and supplies , this is a short list that could put jobs back in the US . Then we could just maybe save our country .
RMHK @ 110:
You're right, we destroyed that country and murdered their citizens. McWarmonger to Maliki, "We broke you, so we own you."
One problem with that is that it might be seen by others as Obama going negative. I still remember this one video clip of one of Obama's town hall meetings where an elderly lady practically begged him to stay above the mud slinging. I think there are many people who want to hear the issues being discussed, but are prevented by the corperate conservative media. Given McCain's inability to actually explain himself to anyone other than a friendly audience, this could hurt him in the long run.
"If it were an extremist government" maybe this is a hint at what is to come. Wonder exactly how extreme this government would have to be in order to justify further years of occupation.
McCain has already been asked this question. He replied first that he was entirely sure that Nouri al-Maliki had been mis-translated or misquoted.
Then when confronted with the fact that not only al-Maliki had said it but other members of the Iraqi government had repeated it and some of them are excellent English-speakers, he started waffling about well, the security situation blah blah blah and the surge blah blah blah and we need to get the SOFA signed first blah blah blah and the Iraqi government hasn't lived up to it's promises to finalize an oil law blah blah blah and then I forget but he probably threw in something about his POW status and the fact that he's a 'military expert' so no one should even ask him this.
Republican's don't give a shit about what the American people want; so why would they care about the will of the Iraqi's?
MyNeckAintRed @ 100:
Now, we didn't buy it. It's not like the Iraqis begged us for help and they need to repay the favor. We forced our way into a situation where we weren't wanted, destroyed huge amounts of their country that they are going to be a generation repairing, and have either directly or indirectly caused the deaths of untold numbers of innocent civilians. They don't owe us jack.
Comments are closed on this entry