Home › Blogs › Dan Spencer's blog ›

Obama Reconsiders Iraq

Submitted by Dan Spencer on Fri, 05/30/2008 - 15:50
in

"Look at what happened in the last two years since Senator Obama visited and declared the war lost," the GOP presidential nominee-in-waiting told The Associated Press in an interview, noting that the Illinois senator's last trip to Iraq came before the military buildup that is credited with curbing violence.

"He really has no experience or knowledge or judgment about the issue of Iraq and he has wanted to surrender for a long time," the Arizona senator added. "If there was any other issue before the American people, and you hadn't had anything to do with it in a couple of years, I think the American people would judge that very harshly."

It started on Sunday, when Senator Lindsey Graham noted Obama's long absence from Iraq and floated the idea that Obama and McCain should go to Iraq together to be briefed by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Asked whether he'd be willing to take such a trip, McCain told the AP: "Sure. It would be fine."

Obama's initial reaction was derisive. He called the proposed fact-finding trip "nothing more than a political stunt."

Feeling the heat over the criticism that he is not open to considering the facts which may not support his view, Obama announced yesterday that he is now considering a trip to Iraq.

McCain reacted positively to Obama's changed position, saying he is “confident” a trip to Iraq will convince Obama that victory is possible:

“I certainly was…glad to hear that Senator Obama is now quote ‘considering’ a trip to Iraq. It’s long overdue. It’s been 871 days since he was there,” McCain said at a nearly 30 minute media availability Wednesday afternoon, after slamming Obama on the issue at an earlier town hall in Nevada. “I’m confident that when he goes he will then change his position on the conflict in Iraq because he will see the success that has been achieved on the ground…Presidents have to listen and learn. Presidents have to make judgments no matter how unpopular or popular they may be. So the success in Iraq is undeniable.”

[. . .]

“The facts on the ground, I’m sure would convince any objective observer. That’s why I say that I’m encouraged that he’s going because the facts on the ground are very, very clear. The statistics are there. Facts are facts,” McCain told reporters. “And I’m confident that he would certainly…recognize that this strategy is succeeding, and we have drawn down troops to the pre-surge level and we will come home with honor and victory and there will be stability in the region and that will make for a long term benefit to the United States and our national security interests.”

0
Your rating: None

Comments

Actually, with all due

Submitted by Lisa on Fri, 05/30/2008 - 18:39.

Actually, with all due respect to Senator McCain, if you know anyone on the ground in Iraq, you know that the situation is hardly improved. Baghdad is safe, of course, but outside of that the violence has escalated over the past five months.
Anyhow...Obama's fundamental problem is that this election is occurring in 2008 instead of 2006. His campaign rhetoric works very well in a year when everyone's up-in-arms about the war, but that is *so* two years ago. The war is largely out of the headlines...we don't even hear about the soldiers that are lost...instead we're focused on the Obama/Hillary showdown and the economic meltdown. Obama's anti-war rhetoric, so powerful in 2006, is thus rendered largely ineffective and he'll have to come up with some new angles to appeal to the economically disgruntled masses.

Of course it's escalated-the Coalition is on the Offensive.

Submitted by section9 on Fri, 05/30/2008 - 22:54.

Maliki took down al-Sadr's goons in al-Basra and basically force the JAM into a ceasefire there on his terms, after an initial bad start. You don't hear much about Basra anymore because the action didn't quite go according to the narrative.

He then focused on Sadr City, which was al-Sadr's main drag. Once again, the Coalition, primarily Iraqi troops, enjoyed success by using mainly Iraqi troops to deal with the JAM militiamen. What the Coalition found was that Iraqi civilians had become rather tired of having to pay protection money to Sadr's miliitiamen.

Now the war has moved upriver to Mosul, where al-Qaeda is making its last stand and is being annihilated by American and Iraqi infantry.  The inability of Obama to admit these facts and adjust to them brings into stark relief his attachment to his internal narrative of defeatisme and Petainist politics.

Of course, Obama probably gets his news from McClatchy and the Los Angeles Times, so I can't quite blame him if he doesn't know what the heck is going on.

If you've followed what's

Submitted by Lisa on Fri, 05/30/2008 - 23:19.

If you've followed what's been going on in Mosul over the last six months, the enemy is hardly being annihilated. Honestly, I'm not sure Obama's the one in denial. McCain said yesterday, "Basra, Mosul and now Sadr city are quiet and it's long and it's hard and it's tough and there will be setbacks..." You only have to search google news for Mosul to see how inaccurate a characterization of Mosul as "quiet" is.