Obama Confronts Reporter Over "Surge" Question (VIDEO)

At the Unity Conference in Chicago this morning, Barack Obama, for the 365,292nd time, was asked if he felt he needed to admit that the "Surge" worked, and by extension, that McCain is awesome and the Bush administration brilliant. Because the "Surge," a thin sliver of military tactic that lasted a few months and is now over, is the ONE THING about the ENTIRE IRAQ WAR that the press is trying to get their head around. (Exhibit A: Katie Couric)

Here's the question, as asked by Time magazine's Romesh Ratnesar:

RATNESAR: Senator, I want to ask you about a subject you've had to address repeatedly on this trip, which is the situation in Iraq and the question whether the surge has helped improve conditions there. During the primaries, you criticized Senator Clinton for failing to say that her vote authorizing the war was a mistake. Now we have commanders on the ground pretty much saying that the surge succeeded, and yet you've said that if you had to do it all over again, you still would have voted against the surge. We're not going to ask you to change your position here.

OBAMA: You're not going to ask me, but go ahead.

RATNESAR: I would like to know whether you feel that after the last five years, haven't we learned that a commander in chief needs to be willing to acknowledge mistakes or errors in judgment when circumstances change?

So Obama should admit the "surge" has worked because the commanders on the ground say so? The funny thing about those commanders on the ground -- the Bush administration sure had to fire or otherwise hound out of their jobs a WHOLE LOT OF COMMANDERS before we were left with the ones who deploy nothing more than SURGE LOGIC (TM) and knee-jerk reactions whenever they are asked to summarize the strategic situation in Iraq.

And that's the irony of SURGE LOGIC - it actually thrives so long as the conditions include the commander-in-chief never being willing to acknowledge mistakes when circumstances change.

Anyway, Obama's response was this:

You know, I have to say, it is fascinating to me the to hear you guys reemphasize this over and over again. I have not heard yet somebody ask John McCain whether his vote to go into Iraq was a mistake. i haven't, during the entire week that we were having this conversation. And so the question is, what are the strategic judgments that have to be made in order to make America safe? I strongly believe that going into Iraq was a disaster, strategically. It distracted us from finishing the job in Afghanistan. I have acknowledged, repeatedly, in every one of these interviews that the fact that we put more troops in there helped to quell the violence. i've been saying that all week. The question is whether or not my position in suggesting that we need to begin a phased withdrawal, we should have begun it earlier, whether that position that I took was a mistake, and I do not believe it was, because I continue to believe that the only way for us to stabilize the situation in Iraq -- I believed it then, and I believe it now -- is for the parties to arrive at a set of political accommodations.

Story continues below

advertisement

Actually, Obama's wrong about one of his contentions: McCain was asked once about whether it was a mistake to go into Iraq. Wolf Blitzer questioned him about it on Friday. Watch SURGE LOGIC in action:

BLITZER: But he says that when it comes to judgment, back in 2002 and 2003, early 2003, before the war, he made the right call in opposing the war to begin with, and he says you blundered, you made the wrong call in supporting going to war against Saddam Hussein.

MCCAIN: I would be more than happy to go through all of that again, and historians will. The fact is that Saddam Hussein was bent on the development of weapons of mass destruction, and I'll be glad to discuss that.

The fact is, what did we do at a critical time when we were about to lose the war? We were losing the war.

Senator Obama wanted to get out, I wanted the surge, which was not popular. The surge works. And now what do we do in the future? Do we continue on the path to victory -- and we've succeeded -- or do we set a time for withdrawal and jeopardize and possibly reverse all the gains that we have made? That's the question on the minds of the American people today.

See what I mean? Surge! What it is good for? Avoiding questions of judgment, that's what. Dodging inquiries about the way circumstances have changed. Hewing to the party line long after reality has trumped it.

And like an addict in the throes of meth psychosis, Surge Logic allows for reality to be interpreted in any nonsensical way imaginable. That's what allows McCain to stand in front of the world today and tell us that we were, in fact, greeted as liberators in Iraq. Obama needs to keep on fighting back against Surge Logic, and continue pressing hard for an intervention.

UPDATE: Over at TNR, Noam Scheiber has positive reviews for Obama's answer on the "surge" during his Meet the Press appearance this morning.

Comments

[dartagnan]

Here's what Obama should say:

"When you put 30,000 more cops on the streets, of course violence is going to go down at least temporarily. So in that limited sense I have to say the surge has worked. Has it worked in the sense of creating long-term stability in Iraq or the Mideast region? No, it has not. Next question."

[DoTheMath]

That sounds pretty close to what he has been saying. They just don't want to hear it.

[21stCenturyMan]

2/4/07, ABC, This Week
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yet you are doubtful that 20,000 troops is enough. Aren't you?
MCCAIN: I'm worried...­I would have liked to have seen more, as you know, but apparently, and it's quite a commentary, this is all we got. This is, as I said earlier, all in.
"This is all we got"? "All in"…Iraq? Yes that is quite a commentary. The Bush/McCain surge has left our military incapable of responding to any crisis. Our neglected soldiers in Afghanistan are being killed at ever increasing rates; everyone now agrees they need at least 10,000 reinforcements, but the Pentagon says there are only a “few hundred” available until sometime next year. The surge may have made Iraq safer, but not the USA.

[oldwiseone]

Does anybody remember why we had the surge in the first place?

[eden4barack08]

That's exactly what he's been saying for the past week! Is anybody listening? NO, because they just want to hear him say it the way THEY want to hear it. All they want is for him to say: McWhiner was right, I was wrong, we won the war. That's NOT gonna happen because none of that's true.

[MrMac]

What does a "win" in Iraq look like? I wish John McCain would answer that for us once and for all, but he won't because they want to keep moving the goalpost. We went in to remove a dictator..­. mission accomplished. We went in to disarm them of weapons of mass destructio­n... there were none. We then wanted to setup a democratic government­... done deal. So what are we still there for? What do we have to do to win this thing and come home?

[mikie63]

Let's face it, the repugs have not one positive thing to say about the last eight years of our government. The socalled surge is all they have to talk about. OK, all you repug commenters, tell us all the wonderful, smart, honest, life saving, caring things that this administration has accomplished since 2000. I can't wait to hear all of them!

[UltraClassic]

This example of saint Obama's inabiity to admit he was wrong is a prelude of things to come. He contorts, twists and redefines success in Iraq.

It's not that the saint does not believe that success has happened. The saint knows that if he admitted it, the DailyKos / MoveOn crowd would go ape. He is towing their line, not his own.

[oldwiseone]

Apparently you are not capable of reading. THe surge was to enable the Iraqi government to work together. The success we see today was because a cease fire was called.

[Big0725]

That's one of the reasons. Massive payoffs to tribal leaders, Sunnis just getting tired of insurgents doing crap while hiding amonst them and, the biggest part, the absolute success of ethnic cleansing. There are no longer integrated neighborhoods.

[mollyjackson]

Oboma has no idea if the surge worked....­he was having to many photo ops.

[qdog112]

Stop crying. McCain wanted it and now he's crying like a B....

Face it, Barack has seized the world stage and it's his for the next 8+ years.

[Heavy]

That would be TOO many photo ops. We are so sorry that massive throngs of people show up to see him and McSame can't fill a room. Regardless, your point is moot now that there were heavy attacks today or did you not read that yet? Oh and FYI McCain was the one who suggested he go, and McCain has done his share of foreign speaking engagements as well...the­y were just poorly attended. So sorry. Oh and by the way, he spells his name Obama, not "Oboma".

[mccabe49]

recent rise in violence in Iraq- Obama is right. Photo ops? oh please

[Ourrias]

57 killed by three female suicide bombers in Iraq today - in ONE day!

How's that SURGE WORKING, folks?!?!?­!?????????­???!!!!!!

[DontBeFoolish]

Excellent point. This is definitely not the SURGE WORKING. Howvever, not one network has siad anything comparing the surge working and this new suicide bomb attack. The surge has truly not worked, it is WOR KING along with other things behind the seens.

[Big0725]

Don't you realize the ONLY lives that matter to the Bush crime family are Americans.

[eden4barack08]

No, those don't matter to them either. Twenty nine US soldiers died in June in Iraq, yet they insist the surge worked, just because that number is less than last June's? It's still 29 lives!
And the total since the surge alone is 1,119, in one year!
Bush&Co don't care about either Iraqis nor American lives.

[Afrodite]

uhmmm not exactly
I just read an article in the associate press and it seems like "spread of democracy/" (cough") OIL ....and end of terrorism (cough) "military benefits" outweighs even an american's life. Heck it outweighs about 4000 of them:

EPC DROPS VALUE OF AMERICAN LIFE
"It's not just the American dollar that's losing value. A government agency has decided that an American life isn't worth what it used to be.

The "value of a statistical life" is $6.9 million in today's dollars, the Environmental Protection Agency reckoned in May - a drop of nearly $1 million from just five years ago.
When drawing up regulations, government agencies put a value on human life and then weigh the costs versus the lifesaving benefits of a proposed rule. The less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation, such as tighter restrictions on pollution.

Consider, for example, a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), the lifesaving benefits outweigh the costs. But at $6.9 million per person, the rule costs more than the lives it saves, so it may not be adopted." (Associate press"

[BigLib]

Barry can't admit he's wrong. He'd rather appear delusional than admit a mistake.

[qdog112]

Speaking of delusional - how's Phil Gramm? BTW if the surge worked why aren't the troops coming home?

[dartagnan]

Because WE CAN'T ENDANGER THE SUCCESS OF THE SURGE! That's the beauty of the right-wing position -- if things are going badly we can't come home because things are going badly, and if things are going well we can't come home because that might mean losing the gains we made. The classic Catch 22.

[countfunkula]

At least you didn't call him Barry Hussein. Thanks.

[Heavy]

OMG how many times must it be explained to you. He stated that the increase in troop strengh was successful in bringing down the violence, yet it was not the only factor, which basically everyone agrees to including our government, the Iraqi government, our own military etc. The only ones who seem reluctant to get it are the Rush, Billo, Faux News ditto heads. Do some reading and turn your TV off forever!

[Heavy]

How often do you see McStained hands admit that going into Iraq in the first place was wrong? Rarely. I broke the vase, why can't you admit that my glue is working? You trolls might want to go read about the attacks today before you keep going on about your surge mantra.

[mccabe49]

You are no Lib only delusional rightwingers call him Barry. More violence in Iraq due to suicide bombers. Got a little seroquel to go with those delusions??? Barrack did not make a mistake he was and is correct

[endlesslamest]

People who say that the "Surge is working" are the same people who think Evolution is "only a theory." The Surge solves nothing. It is the equivalent of having more people, with bigger buckets, tossing water out off a sinking ship. Iraq is the Titanic, get off the damn boat already!

http://atrophyannie.com/gallery_pgs/02_Baby01.html

[sydney01]

How in the world did the media drop McCain's Anbar Awakening jumble? McCain is taking away a huge "victory" from Col. MacFarlane and the soldiers that REALLY made the progress in Iraq happen by organizing the political revolution of the Awakening.

It wasn't military force that caused the change, as McCain tries to re-paint history to show.
Changes happened because they worked smarter, not harder, and applied a political tactic instead of just adding more troops.

The confusion of the Anbar Awakening is the biggest misconception of the war, and it shows how lost McCain is when talking about strategy.

[Robgardella]

Depends on how you define "surge" as to whether it worked or not. Please explain to me, just an average voter.

[oldwiseone]

Go back and find out what the surge was supposed to do, then come back to today and ask if it worked.

[Janney]

McCain has gone around saying he knows about "war", he knows how to win "wars", my question to everyone reading this entry, What wars is he talking about? Which war did he win? Will someone enlighten me please?

[eden4barack08]

POW for 5 years = knowledge how to win wars

[claudiam]

Excellent! Barack should have answered this silly "surge" question like this long ago. The media is relentless when it comes to answering their questions THEIR way. Most of us are intelligent enough to have understood Barack when he answered this question. Get over it Media Folks!!!! and let us move on. McCain should have been asked about supporting this war month's ago.

[Pyott]

Even if the modest 15% surge in the numbers of Iraq troops could definitively be determined to have been exclusively responsible for the (still limited) progress we've seen over the past 9-12 months, it doesn't detract from the argument the Iraq invasion was a horrendous mistake in judgment to begin with -- and that the people responsible for it need to be retired from public office.

The financial, political, and human costs of the decision to go into Iraq in the first place VASTLY ECLIPSE any costs one might argue could be associated with opposing the surge. McCain would like us to conveniently forget this.

In terms of the costs associated with the invasion and occupation -- for the U.S., Iraq, and the rest of the world -- it is MCCAIN'S judgment which is most in question here, not Obama's. Just take a look for youself:

- 150,000+ violent deaths, and counting
- 250,000+ non-violent deaths associated with the invasion & occupation
- 200,000 wounded (incl. 15,000+ amputees)
- 20,000 PTSD cases
- 3 million refugees
- $800+ billion, and counting

[Mschmal]

Did the surge work?

The fact that people even think about the question this way just shows how far the administration has hoodwinked the press and the public.

The expectations have fallen so low that any improvement is spun into some kind of victory dance.

As long as American Troops are still dieing in Iraq, than American Iraq policy is a failure! Just because troops are not dieing as fast as they use to doesn't create a success.

That is like saying telling a wounded soldier that the amputation worked. The guy still lost a leg and would have been better off if he had never been injured in the first place.

To say that the "Surge is working" is a slap in the face of every family that has a loved one serving in harms way. I hope McBush wakes up a realizes this and I hope Obama doesn't give into the press pandering.

[Fotios]

Good point!

Did the surge work? No! We are still there and Bush and McCain still want us there.

Even if the surge did work, does that mean that Obama was wrong? No! He had a different plan that involved two of the major things that made the surge possible - convincing political reconsilliation between the Iraqi Govt., the Sunnis in Anbar and the Sadr Militia. Obama's plan may have worked better.

[oldwiseone]

Actually that is what happened and instead of getting credit he is faulted.

[MalamuteMan]

Eloquent!!! Bravo!!! Well Said!!!

[urojen]

Why does every media person buy into this idea that surge is the only reason for improvement in the situatiion in Iraq.While we admire the exemplary work done by our soldiers,we should not forget the Iraqi people showed a lot of courage in their bold attempts to fight the insurgency­.There wer multiple factors for the prevailing condition.­We bribed the Sunni insurgents which is surge of bribery.We armed the insurgents which is surge of ammunition which at times was used to kill Americans as we had no control over how they wer used.Then there is surge of patiotism in Iraq which has led people of Iraq to defy death to come together in places like Anbar to fight the insurgents­.Yes the surge worked,not what Bush and McCain are referring to.It is the Irqi people who deserve the maximum credit.We put more soldiers and lost more.In the meanwhile Al-qeida regrouped in Iraq.Did any one ask McCain his surge was the reason we had no troops to free to fight the real enemy in Afghanistan?We were fighting a civil war in Iraq.The real enemy was in Afghanistan Obama wanted to go after.Who looks like the Commander in Chief. Did Romesh ask thses tough questions to the Bush administration in the lead upto the war?He was propagating instead of asking the right questions!

[Wistful]

What an informative comment!
Well, we now know that the MSM can ask questions after all.
Have Bush or McCain or Cheney ever been asked to account for their conduct?
The difference between how Obama is being unrelentingly grilled and the cosseting hands off treatment of the Bush Regime is nothing short of criminal.
Between their laughing like Hyenas at those Washington dinners at Bush's depraved jokes and their absolute silence in the face of evil is indefensible.

[Wistful]

"The Surge" is just Neocon-speak for sending in "reinforcements" -- done in every war.
Mr. Obama might ask his MSM poodles and sock puppets for the Neocons if that's actually what they are meaning by using the word "surge". I personally would choose "purge" for God only knows how many Iraqis were killed and their homes, animals and property steamrolled and destroyed by this tactic, I can only imagine those convoys armed with the most powerful arms just wreaking havoc in Iraq.
We will NEVER know the damage we have done in Iraq because the Pentagon, in the service of the Bush regime, has strictly controlled access to the results of their ongoing war on the Iraqi people.
Totally and completely, no pictures, no honest, critical reporting even.