Iraq Spat Could Be McCain-Obama Preview

Washington Post: War Of Words Foreshadows General-Election Brawl Over Foreign Policy

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Michael D. Shear and Shailagh Murray.

---

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) of making ill-informed comments about Iraq and al-Qaeda in Tuesday night's Democratic presidential debate, signaling that a general-election brawl between the colleagues would center in part on who has the foreign policy experience to lead a country at war.

Despite McCain's war-hero status and years of foreign policy experience, Obama made it clear that he will not back down from such a fight, issuing a quick rebuke of McCain that linked him to President Bush and the war in Iraq.

The spat began when McCain seized on a comment by Obama that he would reserve the right to return to Iraq after withdrawing troops "if al-Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq."

"I have some news," McCain told voters at a rally here Wednesday morning. "Al-Qaeda is in Iraq. Al-Qaeda is called 'al-Qaeda in Iraq.' My friends, if we left, they wouldn't be establishing a base. . . . they would be taking a country. I will not allow that to happen, my friends. I will not surrender."

McCain has pledged to keep U.S. forces in Iraq as long as it takes to create stability, form a unified government and defeat terrorist groups. He favors adding more troops, if necessary, to achieve those goals.

Obama, who opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, has said that there is no military solution to the conflict and that he would start bringing troops home after becoming president to force Iraqi factions to resolve their differences. Obama said he would withdraw about one to two combat brigades a month, with the goal of having all of them out within 16 months.

For McCain, the decision to pick a fight with Obama helps keep the presumptive GOP nominee from being overshadowed by the battle between Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) for the Democratic presidential nomination. It also gives him a chance to undermine confidence in Obama's foreign policy experience before the Democrat can turn full attention to the general election.

But even as he focuses on a potentially decisive showdown with Clinton in four contests next Tuesday, Obama has made it clear he won't ignore the attacks from McCain. Generating headlines about an Obama-McCain showdown could also benefit Obama by creating the sense among Democratic primary voters that he is on the verge of becoming their party's nominee and also that he can hold his own against the Republicans.

Speaking to 7,000 voters at Ohio State University on Wednesday, Obama answered McCain's mocking tone with his own.

"McCain thought that he could make a clever point by saying, 'Well let me give you some news, Barack, al-Qaeda is in Iraq.' Like I wasn't reading the papers, like I didn't know what was going on. I said, 'Well, first of all, I do know that al-Qaeda is in Iraq; that's why I've said we should continue to strike al-Qaeda targets.

"I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al-Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq." The crowd roared its approval. "I've got some news for John McCain. He took us into a war along with George Bush that should have never been authorized and should have never been waged. They took their eye off the people who were responsible for 9/11, and that would be al-Qaeda in Afghanistan that is stronger now than at any time since 2001.

"So John McCain may like to say he wants to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but so far all he's done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq that's cost us thousands of lives and billions of dollars."

The exchange between McCain and Obama began when the senator from Illinois answered a question by debate moderator Tim Russert, who posed the hypothetical situation of a return to Iraq by al-Qaeda after the United States withdraws troops. Obama said the United States would have to return in that case.

"As commander in chief, I will always reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests," Obama said in the debate. "And if al-Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."

McCain seized on those words, saying they showed a lack of understanding of the terrorist group's activities in the country.

The Sunni extremist group al-Qaeda in Iraq was formed in response to the U.S. presence in Iraq. The U.S. military thinks that the group's activities -- such as large-scale car bombings of Shiite gathering places -- peaked in 2006 and that American forces destroyed much of the organization in a series of raids last year.

The group is "frustrated" but "not defeated," Maj. Gen. Jeffrey W. Hammond, commander of the 4th Infantry Division, said in an interview last month. U.S. officials say that coalition forces have pushed the group largely out of Baghdad and Anbar province, but that it remains active in the upper Tigris River valley.

McCain's attack on Obama's answer is the latest attempt by the Republican to cast Obama as inexperienced on foreign policy. Several months ago, McCain criticized Obama for suggesting that he would bomb al-Qaeda targets in Pakistan without that country's approval.

"The best idea is to not broadcast what you are going to do. That's naive," McCain said earlier this month. "You make plans and you work with the other country that is your ally and friend, which Pakistan is. You don't broadcast and say you are going to bomb the country without their permission or without consulting them. This is the fundamentals of the conduct of national security policy."

Murray reported from Ohio. Staff writer Thomas E. Ricks in Washington contributed to this report.

[jegibbons]

Now, Mother you must admit, that everytime you resort to using hyperbole it''s because the facts do not support your position. You can''t simply make up your own facts.

Why not? They are mine.

Please! If we HOPE to discuss this you must be reasonable.

I guess I know more about HOPE than you do.

No one has a corner on HOPE. That is something that is available to everyone.

You are mocking me. That''s not fair. You are not playing fair!

I''m sorry. But here it is. Your facts are from sources like the NY Times, who are obviously making it up to support a bias. That''s not the job of a news organization.

It''s not fair. You are not being fair.

Please, don''t cry!

[taotxzen]

I you consider the Statue of Liberty, the very symbol to the world of freedom and hope. Its promise is not to favor the previleged few above all others. Americas greatness will never be determined by how well we reward the most priveliged.

[popstom1]

I never voted G.bushnut but I will not vote for Obamanaition now get the obama play book out to what
you need to say next

[taotxzen]

I heard a great quote the other day, someone said, "Americas greatest promise is that we are free to be left alone to do what we want."

[taotxzen]

What is it Liberals really want?

Watch or listen to Fox, Rush, Coulter, Cunningham any of the far right flamethrowers. Count how long it takes for one of these wingnuts to say, %u2018This is what liberals want%u2026%u2019 and then proceed to say something so off the wall that it is laughable. It is straight from the Rove playbook.

This is what we actually want, remember it for the next time:

We want a system of laws and government that reflects what we value, and we want the ordering of that system to reflect empathy and caring for other human beings, as put forward in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)

We value freedom. To ensure freedom from want and freedom of opportunity. People should be free from want, and of the need to work 80 hours a week at $5.85 an hour.

We value equality. Everyone should have equal opportunity and be treated equally under the law. Government empowerment, building a road, upholding a banking system, supporting courts, is not just empowerment for business but equally for individuals.

Where there are people who are born with less opportunity, the government has a moral obligation to make sure they wind up with equal opportunity, in education, in health, and without discrimination. As President Lyndon B. Johnson said in 1965 at the Howard University commencement, "It is not enough to open the gates of opportunity; all our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates."

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)

We also value security. Knowing that %u2018crime is lower when poverty is lower%u2019 we believe that %u2018broad prosperity is crucial to security.%u2019 Integrity, responsibility, and fairness are also very important to us.

However, the meanings of these ideas are contested. They mean different things to different people depending on how they view the world. Many common issues and ideas contain contested concepts. It is important to understand that a contested concept enables conservatives to use an idea such as freedom to represent a different concept and thus undermine the progressive American concept of freedom.

Conservatives know this and use words such as %u2018freedom%u2019 when they are talking about market liberalization and deregulation rather than civil liberties. Indeed, conservatives have been endeavoring to shift the meanings of these words to reflect the values of a radical minority.

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)

The conservative goal of imposing their policies on America is wholly dependent on their ability to control the terms of the debate and shift the meanings of these words to reflect their values. Therefore it is necessary to reject the frame of this question and assert that we as progressives are defending American values from the onslaught of a corrupt and radical minority.

Indeed for the last seven years, conservatives have been imposing policies that defy and trample upon American values. The deregulation of industry, reduction of taxes for the rich, privileging the profit motive in our health care system, elimination of funding for social programs such as public education or Medicare, blindly pumping over 670 billion dollars annually into the Military budget- not including the cost of the war in Iraq and the unconstitutional and unsupervised spying on American citizens are disastrous and alienating policies that rely on the idea that each of us is left to succeed or fail on our own without any support from our communities and with no empathy and caring for our fellow human beings %u2013see New Orleans.

We want American Values.

Dashielle Vawter
Joe Brewer.

[vmcneal2]

Many of you anti- Obama people voted the the current Bush..twice so you got into this mess. Now you''re going to vote for another trigger happy ready..fire..aim Republican?????

[taotxzen]

McCain''s Iraq Fantasia

Posted by Joe Klein, TIME.com

John McCain continues to fight a different war in Iraq than...the U.S. military. It is a simple war of good v. evil, us v. Al Qaeda. There are aspects of truth to what he says--we''ve had good success this past year in the fight against the local branch of Al Qaeda, which the military calls Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). But we''ve had that success mostly because Iraq''s Sunni population turned on the terrorists and sent them packing.

Which brings us to today''s edition. The political news was: McCain takes a roundhouse swing at Obama; Obama counterpunches elegantly. But what caught my Iraq-obsessed eye was this statement from McCain:
"And my friends, if we left, they (al-Qaida) wouldn''t be establishing a base," McCain said Wednesday. "They''d be taking a country, and I''m not going to allow that to happen, my friends. I will not surrender. I will not surrender to al-Qaida."

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)

They''d be taking a country? Last time I checked, Iraq has a Shiite majority. McCain thinks the Shiites--the Mahdi Army, the Badr Corps (and yes, the Iranians)--would allow a small group of Sunni extremists to take over? In fact, as noted above, the vast majority of indigenous Iraqi Sunnis aren''''t too thrilled about the AQI presence in their country, either. (The usual caveats apply: AQI is barbaric, dastardly and intent on violating the Qu''''ran by engaging in the annihilation of innocents. We can''''t get rid of them fast enough.)

The sadness here is that McCain knows better. He knows the complexities of the world, and the region. But I suspect he''''s overplaying his Iraq hand in order to win favor with the wingnuts in his party. That is extremely unfortunate: As McCain should know better than anyone, it is extremely dishonorable for politicians to play bloody-shirt games when the nation is at war.

[jegibbons]

Mother: I have to ask you one question.

Is this about Borak, again?

Oh? It''s Borak now!

Why not? Don''t you see that he''s ''My Guy'', plus he''s so-o-o dreamy & handsome.

Ah huh!?? He''s all about Change, RIGHT?

That''s right: Hope & Change!

Ah huh!?? WHAT do you HOPE he changes into?

[kansas1946]

Hang in there Barack. You are right and John McCain is wrong. We heard this same blather about leaving Viet Nam. It was horrible for a while, but they pulled it together and now are one of our trading partners. If the Iraqis can''t get along and can''t appreciate the chance for change and democracy that we gave them, then too bad.

[jegibbons]

But he''s such a nice looking young man. Don''t you want to see something new?

But Mother, those Islamo-facists will have him for lunch!

I don''t care he''s for HOPE & CHANGE and I''m for that!

But Mother, what does he plan to do?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Mother?

I''''m thinking. Give me a minute.

[aldena13]

It''s too bad this blog ended so soon, I think it was important. But I work on the day crew.

I am constantly aware that nothing sticks to Sen Obama. He can take the high road on every position. I keep asking myself how?

I listen to local talk radio on the way home from work - two Republicans talking about how Sen McCain will be able to bury Sen Obama talking about the real issues.... hasn''t that been what Sen Clinton has been trying to do for the past year plus? And look where it got her.

Nothing sticks. Why? I think I know but the Republicans better figure it out pretty quick.

Honestly I have given to Sen Clinton''s campaign. I have never given to any campaign before. Working in the insurance world I know that the basis of her health care plan - universal -is the only hope for Americans. What happens after that is totally up for negotiation.

Republicans better wake up soon. This ain''t going to be pretty or easy.

[lckmstr4u]

Perhaps McCain is in some type of get back mentality, for his p.o.w. experience, get back at a country that many Vietmam vets feel betrayed them, so Yeah he would n''t care to be at war for 10, 100 10,000 yrs , McCain is a war monger , pull out save face or make a parking lot out of the country and take care of the people like we do the Japanese.

[tibu987]

Quote, author unknown:

"We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are."

Seems as though that would be appropriate to describe war-monger McCain.

[tibu987]

McCain quote:
"I don''t think Americans care if we are in Iraq for 10 years, 100 years, or 10,000 years."
That does say quite a bit, does it not?
Substitute tears for years.

[vmcneal2]

Abnern...Obama vs John"more of the same"McCain. McCain is a shoot first ask questions later guy. This is the type of BS that got us stuck in Iraq in the first place. Maybe some people vote based on lapel pins but most Americans think a little deeper than that.

[tibu987]

sorry for the incorrect length in my last message.