« McCain's Economists | Main | Edmund Burke, Patron Saint of Organic Food »

July 09, 2008

Comments

It's usually unproductive to distinguish too much between what a politician "really believes" and what is done for "political reasons." George Wallace probably backed segregation for political reasons. Ronald Reagan increased and Bill Clinton reduced the deficit for political reasons. De Gaulle left Algeria for political reasons. That's what politicians do, and Iraqi politicians aren't different. Even politicians who do brave things -- like Anwar Sadat, say -- still act for political reasons.

McCain is taking his domestically-based lack of respect for the political craft, and applying it to Iraq.

Eric: "That doesn't sound like a position that we can maintain long term."

Not to me either. Nor, frankly, can I see why we would want to. Personally, the idea that the Iraqi government is getting strong enough to start flexing its muscles fills me with unqualified joy (and some surprise: I didn't expect this.)

Right: "don't worry about Maliki, he's just saying what he has to beause the Iraqi people want us gone, and surely that's irrelevant".

Why won't McCain support the troops?

Also, what Pithlord said.

I'm not sure if this is an accurate depiction of this situation, but what I'm seeing is:

The Iraqi people want us to leave. The Iraqi government, democratically elected so far as that goes in Iraq, is now also saying they want us to leave. McCain says we shouldn't leave because the Iraqi government is doing it for political reasons (they are...representing? their country). The surge is working, but we can't leave until we've achieved victory, even if the surge was supposed to make it so we could leave. Would McCain prefer it if Iraq were just autocratic and friendly instead of democratic and hostile?

My head a splode.

Would McCain prefer it if Iraq were just autocratic and friendly instead of democratic and hostile?

Yes.

Would McCain prefer it if Iraq were just autocratic and friendly instead of democratic and hostile?

Not just McCain, but the whole Bush administration with their post-war Chalibi plan.

And what Katherine said -- we are "winning" and have to stay in order to keep on "winning," even though the irrelevant Iraqi people want us gone.

I wish for once the brain dead war supporters would define "winning," and explain how that is possible when the Iraqi people hate us.

Winning is easy to define. Eliminate the rest of the terrorists, and we have won. There are already far less there than when Saddam commanded huge armies of them. The only thing "brain dead" would be to surrender. That is what a troop withdrawal without victory really is.

"Out of Iraq Now" is not an anti-war attitude at all, because a surrender would leave Iraq as it was under Saddam: a place that terrorists used as a base to attack other countries. McCain is probably the most anti-war of the two candidates, as he is most likely to remove the root cause of the war: the groups of terrorists in Iraq.

Winning is easy to define. Eliminate the rest of the terrorists, and we have won.

Define terrorist. Operationalize.

Iraq as it was under Saddam: a place that terrorists used as a base to attack other countries.

Oh-ho! We have a true believer in "Iraq was responsible for 9/11" among us!

Oh-ho! We have a true believer in "Iraq was responsible for 9/11" among us!

Or a troll. I think we have one in the Jesse Helms thread, so...

McCain is probably the most anti-war of the two candidates, as he is most likely to remove the root cause of the war: the groups of terrorists in Iraq.

Also, just for giggles: define anti-war. Please try to do it in a way that does not invite comparisons to clichés, because that last sentence has an extremely strong "Baby, you know I don't want to bomb your cities and restructure your bureaucracy, so why you gotta make me?" vibe.

""Baby, you know I don't want to bomb your cities and restructure your bureaucracy, so why you gotta make me?" vibe."

Or, to quote Sparks, "baby, baby, can I invade your country?"

Props for the Morrisey reference.

And directly connected -- okay, completely off-topic -- Gorilla Jesus.

"Would McCain prefer it if Iraq were just autocratic and friendly instead of democratic and hostile?"

They love Hamas, which was democratically elected, right? And that Musharaff lost his elections?

Oh, wait.

"They" was intended to be a clear referent to the Bush Admin, actually, but I'm, like, all tired and stoopid.

Or, to quote Sparks, "baby, baby, can I invade your country?"

"If you really loved me, you'd let me invade."

"If you really loved me, you'd let me invade."

"Countries, planets, stars, galaxies so far.... don't let freedom fade, baby - let's invade."

none: Eliminate the rest of the terrorists, and we have won.

"We had to kill the entire world in order to save it."

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad