Go for it. He's for the "America, its all about us" crowd. Time to hit him over and over with 10,000 years in Iraq.... Focus on how their hubris hurts us.

How predictable.

This does not help Hillary.

McCain is now at the mercy of all sorts of groups in Iraq, who think they can make a fool of him.

The political progress is not there---the surge is having to be extended.

If it worked, then, when are we leaving? 100 years from now?

"al Qaeda in Iraq"

An invention of DoD.

Furthermore, the basic question is what is the relevance of Iraq to anything else? Is Iraq the template for another invasion? If not - and I'd sure like to hear McCain argue it is - then Iraq is essentially irrelevant to the broader "war on terrorism"....In fact, it's so compicated over there - need I say "byzantinian", that what is needed is flexibility, diplomacy, a "big stick", and patience. All things the NeoCons don't emphasize.

Not to mention that nothing McCain has done between 2002 and 2007 shows any great understanding of anything in Iraq.

And yes, we just to keep repeating, one and half trillion dollars, and counting.

Someone better inform the Dementia Express that Iraq no longer exists.

so mccain's "straight talk express" is a Kamakazi plane ???

why doesn't mccain just shoot himself in the head, instead of the foot

What I can't stand is that McCain is benefitting from moving the goalposts after we laid the groundwork to make it obvious they were pulling such a stunt during Petreaus. The line against the General was not that the surge would not lessen violence -- everyone accepted that was a possibility -- but that it would not create the stability for reconciliation among the Iraqis, the surge's stated purpose. Critiques like me said any lessening of violence would probably be short lived, would not result in a united Iraqi government, and basically just gabe Bush the breathing room he needed to slip out of office and blame the broken back of the military on the poor fool left with cleaning up his mess.

So we were right and McCain was wrong. McCain was at his most disingenuous marching through the Bagdhad Market with 300 soldiers and Blackhawk helicopters overhead to demonstrate it was safe.

It was a foregone conclusion that Iraq would bottom out at some point, as all conflicts do, including Rwanda. The questions was whether it would be through reconciliation and Democracy or ethnic cleansing and civil war. Bush's strategy gave us the latter. So that fact that we aren't still in freefall for the time being doesn't mean much. It's still not the flowers in the streets McCain promised, and primarily because of the Bush Administration running of the war he alone, other than Leiberman, still embraces.

So, by all means, clutch to Bush's War as your saving grace with conservatives and an example of you unyielding denial of reality. We all want more of that. But I'm not letting him move the goalposts again.

We were proved right, yet again, as we have every single time these last eight years. The surge has given us nothing but cover for Bush's ego, at the expense of our military.

We can't leave, so how good is the surge working? No one thinks we're going to "win" this thing, leaving behind a stable Democracy, without being there 100, 1,000 years. So where's the success in having to spend blood and treasure for centuries to come on a failed state to contain the damage that had been contained in the containment strategy of previous administrations?

Where is the political improvements? Why must our troops stay over there at the number they will be at by the end of the summer (135,000) -- the same as we had last year and the year before that?

We sent over 170,000 troops into Iraq (peak reported by Reuters) by last summer. We'll end up with the same amount we had before the surge.

We have to PAY the Iraqi's to STAND UP and protect their own neighborhoods. What will they do if we stop paying?

Even the general says it's not certain that the surge will be ultimately successful.

Now, explain why the surge is working again? Please?

Coonsey's View
www.freewebs.com/coonsey/

Since McCain has drunk the Bush kool-aid, perhaps, he should read the latest post from Reagan's former NSA director, Lt. Gen. William Odom:

http://niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=00323

The general is probably far from liberal, but he's been clear on Iraq from the beginning (search for his posts on Nieman Watchdog to see them all). Contrary to many in the press, and current political campaigns ignoring Iraq for the moment, the surge is not working as McCain thinks.

This is almost bound to back-fire. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the violence INCREASED during certain parts of the year? All he needs is for the violence to surge during the GOP Convention to destroy that strategy.

Of course, the wonderful GOP logic will dictate that the terrorists are only doing this because they want the DEMs to win.

Also, is he sure he wants Bush to endorse him? Not sure whether it's better to gain some right-wing support but lose more middle support.

What Iraqi government are you talking about? The central government we are propping up in the Green Zone? The "precincts" outlined by blast walls and protected by militias? The tribal governments? The religious governments with their own militaries? The United States government in Iraq with a dollar bill in one hand and a cannon in the other?

The word "government" when applied to the geographic location Iraq is a bit difficult to define.

Remind me please, when does Obama say we will leave Iraq?
How does Obama's latest "no timetables" differ from McCain?
BTW, this is most definitely not criticism of Obama.
I merely wish to point up the difficulty Obama will have against McCain.
"We never should have gone in".
Well yes, but most Americans supported the invasion (what? 85%?) and anyway that is so five years ago and what will Obama do in '08?
Outside the antiwar left, midAmerica does have real qualms about pulling out and leaving what?
I suppose that we must await the GE for that conversation but to laugh away the threat to Obama is I think a bit of in the bubble thinking.

Contrary to the glowing depictions of Iraq in the US press, Baghdad is engulfed in a lake of sewage so big it can be seen on Google Earth, many neighborhoods lack water, and electricity supply is insufficient and spotty. Although the Iraqi government crows about building clinics, the fact is that most nurses and physicians have fled, and medicines are in short supply. Last I knew, water purification was being impeded by US blockades on chlorine trucks coming in from Jordan. Some 70% of Iraqis do not have access to clean water, and there have been 100 recent cases of cholera in the capital, especially in the slum of Sadr City.

Juan Cole keeps the real facts about the surge coming.

That would be some Weimar era anti-Nazi propaganda from Heartfield if I'm not mistaken.

Saw an exhibit of his at the Getty a few years back, he was a master for that time period.

Billy Glad,
Your posts seem to contradict each other.

McCain, as someone who tells the truth, is just a myth.

McCain has flipped on almost every issue of substance in order to cynically pander to the worst elements of the political sphere. (This list includes but is not limited to campaign finance, torture, taxes, domestic surveillance, immigration and much more.) On the 3 trillion dollar disaster in mass murder adventurism however his has not wavered. Escalate any war the U.S. is in and wage as many wars against the weak as possible.

Throughout his life he has shown profound weakness of character. He has a pattern of revealing that he knows what the principled, honorable, or ethical position or path to take is, only to do the opposite as his consistently weak character gives way to corruption, calculation and expediency.

After seeing over 130 shipmates burn to death from napalm and high explosives. He said it opened his eyes to the horrific suffering of napalm and that he didn't think he could any longer bomb the civilian areas of North Viet Nam. But within 3 weeks a few brave North Vietnamese saved his life of the vengeful crowd that had seen the mass murder of hundreds of thousands from his bombs and others. That flip against what he recognized as right is his life-long pattern.

Last year he allowed amendments to his anti-torture bill which reversed the effect of the legislation so as to allow its use, ban any civil suits for its use and thus any ability to expose it, allow torture coerced statements and confessions in kangaroo trials, provide de facto impunity for using torture including allowing the use of reliance on (bogus criminal) legal opinions allowing it as a defense. He said not one word, allowed it to be portrayed as a successful thankless campaign against torture, and did not expose that the bill had become the torturers dream.

Though his imaginary positive character traits like GW’s are media creations, the difference seems to be that McCain often knows what is right before he betrays the principle.

Based on the evidence, some things can be said about McCain:
A man of principles to which he adheres regardless of consequence, he is not.
A man of truth and honor, he is not.
A rogue bucking the system he is not.
A phony who with the media cultivates his false image is what he remains.

Peace
JK

It's also worth noting that Obama, perhaps more so than Hillary, can argue that if we'd never invaded, there would never have been any Al Qaeda in Iraq in the first place."Perhaps more so than Hillary"?

You got that right.

Except, of course, for the "perhaps" part.