Translation
One Hundred Years in Iraq?
John McCain, the Republican candidate for president who dubiously claims the status of war hero because he was imprisoned and beaten after bombing civilian targets in North Vietnam 40 years ago, apparently wants other young men to have the chance to become war heroes.
He continues to be dogged by a remark he made in January during the New Hampshire primary. At a town meeting a man asked McCain what he thought of President Bush’s statement that U.S. forces could be in Iraq for 50 years.
“Maybe 100!” McCain said. “We’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. It’s fine with me — I hope it’d be fine with you — if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where al-Qaeda is training, recruiting, and equipping and motivating people every single day.”
Later, McCain amplified his position in response to questions from David Corn of Mother Jones:
I don’t think so. Sen. Hillary Clinton accurately summarized McCain’s position: “He said recently he could see having troops in Iraq for 100 years.” Sen. Barack Obama put some spin into his summary, but was certainly in the ballpark, “Senator McCain said the other day that we might be mired for 100 years in Iraq — which is reason enough not to give him four years in the White House” (http://tinyurl.com/2b4bdz).
McCain is wrong about al-Qaeda in Iraq. By nearly all accounts, it is a minor element in the country, largely despised by its fellow Sunni Muslims. Moreover, the group wasn’t even in the country until the United States invaded. Saddam Hussein distrusted Osama bin Laden. Before 2003 an al-Qaeda operative was in northern Iraq, but that was the semi-autonomous Kurdish region that Saddam did not control.
Nevertheless, since McCain believes al-Qaeda is an important force there, his openness to keeping U.S. troops there for a hundred, a thousand, or a million years in defense of America’s interest in the region signifies his openness to continuing war and American casualties — not to mention Iraqi casualties, which seem to count for little in the eyes of Americans.
How can this be if he stresses that a long occupation is acceptable only if no Americans are killed or injured? The answer is that McCain is not likely to end an occupation because of American casualties. He attacks the Democrats for wanting to do this now, so he could hardly follow that course himself. His real point, which he has said on other occasions, is that the American people would not object to a long occupation if there are no casualties.
Thus it is no exaggeration to say that McCain would accept 100 years of bloody occupation if that is what it took to win in his view. The Democrats’ charge against him is true.
Oddly, last November McCain seemed to understand the implications of a long-term occupation when he appeared on Charlie Rose’s television program and expressed opposition to a long-term occupation even if there were no casualties.
ROSE: Do you think that this — Korea, South Korea is an analogy of where Iraq might be, not in terms of their economic success but in terms of an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years, that we will have a significant amount of troops there?
McCAIN: I don’t think so.
ROSE: Even if there are no casualties?
McCAIN: No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws [emphasis added; http://tinyurl.com/38hvlf].
Which is it, Mr. Straight Talk? Is a long occupation acceptable or not?
 Mr. Richman's articles on population, federal disaster assistance, international trade, education, the environment, American history, foreign policy, privacy, computers, and the Middle East have appeared in the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, American Scholar, Chicago Tribune, USA Today, Washington Times, Insight, Cato Policy Report, Journal of Economic Development, The Freeman, The World & I, Reason, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Middle East Policy, Liberty magazine, and other publications. He is a contributor to the Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics. Articles by Sheldon Richman at MWC News http://mwcnews.net/sheldon-richman |
Quote this article on your site | Views: 1468Comments (3) |  |
I stopped reading this kool-aid fueled Marxist crap at this point.
John McCain is, in fact, an American hero, and their are vast democrats in America who understand this and honor this. He doesn't "dubiously claim" anything! He was labeled this by the American people, you goat-t'd idiot! You and other vicious hard-left liberals simply don't make any sense! Put down the Kool-aid!
I like the slogan of the machine you work for: "Media with Conscience."
When it should read: "Media with Communism."
America is proud of it's founding traditions and will never end up like Canada. E Pluribus Unum, pal.
Second, I don't think McCain is contradicting himself when he says that he does not see the US maintaining the same milatary presents in Iraq as we do in South Korean (which he have to support because of the threats from the north). Could we have a troop reduction and still have a military presents in Iraq? Certainly!
Lastly do american no care about Iraq lives being lost? Of course we do, but they are building their nation. As Iraq's economy gets stronger, the radicals will have less young men and women willing to support them. That will translate into less Iraqi civilian deaths.
Almost none of it is true. You are blatantly lying about what McCain said about 100 years in Iraq (he said if we aren\'t incurring casualties and high cost) and Saddam was NOT afraid of working with al Qaeda, his top men and documents show that he funded, armed, trained and harbored them. See www.regimeofterror.com.
You people in the antiwar camp would have a good argument to make against the war but you continue overreaching and lying and making total asses of yourselves.
|
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4
Tags: Sheldon Richman John McCain Republican