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

[Treasonous1]

Again, the problem is the acceptance by Obama that it is in fact the surge that is largely responible for the reduction in violance. While he hinted at other facts on the ground like the awakening and the truth between secterian parties, he and everyone else treats those like minor secondary events in the reduaction of violance, which is simply not the case. They are the main reason and the cause of at least 75% of the reduction in violance. Al qaeda was by all accounts only 5% of the insurgency, while through the awakening over 100,000 insurgents that were attaking us have since started colaborating to help get rid of the foreigners. Furtheremore we had this "surge" level of troops before in Iraq and violance was much higher then, once again proving that it is not the number of troops that determine the level of violance, but rather the 'political' developments in these new agreements which is in fact what we were calling for as the only path to success. So what is now going on is in fact a vindication of our viewpoints but pointing that out diminishes the efforts of our troops. So sicne the troops are responible for the low levels of violance there's no need to fund other iraqi alies; just put fort a proposal to divert that money elsewhere. Let the media and McCain out point out what a naive and irresponsible idea it would be becuase of the chaos it creates in Iraq.

[saltpeter]

The surge is NOT susainable. There is NO Military solution in Iraq. "The SURGE" is a talking point in a series of talking points about this war (WMDs, taking down Saddam, bringing "democracy" to the Middle East) that holds the intent of focusing the world's attention on a minute detail and allowing people to de-focus on the BIGGER PICTURE. Bin Laden is STILL at large, CIVIL WAR is still happening in IRAQ; radical Shia and Sunni in Iran and Sauid Arabia have been empowered and enriched through the war in IRAQ and there is still NO END IN SIGHT. The two most important factors to reduce the conflict is for America to wean itself from the need for oil sooner than later, and to expand IRAQ'S economy so that it can rebuild some semblance of a Middle Class and bring about some sot of functioning infrastructure. Without a strong MIDDLE CLASS and FUNCTIONING INFRASTRUCTURE any temporary military gains WILL NOT STAND. The surge means nothing as long as profiteers rip away the little precious wealth that is contained within Iraq that can support peace and prosperity.

[Bluejay00234]

Yep.

[RJII]

Amen. Of course if you throw more troops means less violence, until those troops leave. I'm with Obama, we should not have been there in the first place. And the resources of the surge mean't less treasury at home to deal with the real issues.

[condew]

When McCain agreed that a 16 month timetable was about right, maybe he was acknowledging the realities that our military cannot maintain the pace. No matter who is in the whitehouse for the next 4 years, our presence will be reduced, the "surge" in suicide and "surge" post-raumatic stress shows we are on the verge of breaking our army.

[research]

you mean the continuing Surge in Iraqi deaths?

[mergina]

Yes, that and the ever increasing amount of BORROWED MONEY hemorrhaging out of this country into the coffers of bush and cheney and their minions of greed.

[Levittown]

Why is the press trying to justify the surge ? Why is the press trying to make Obama seem unpatriotic and flip flopping ? Why do the interviewers close their ears to Obamas consistent answers and challenge him on his response. Do they have a agenda to build up the petulant McCain. He will fumble and stumble and mumble his way to defeat. Bet on it.

[research]

No one bothered to ask what they meant by:

"Violence is Down"

[3dtrix]

How about every time they say surge, we say access to medical care. How about every time they say Iran, we say infrastructure. How about every time they sat terror, we say education. How about every time they say weapons of mass destruction, we say outsourcing. How about every time they say war, we say global warming. We don't have to have their debate their way - let's have our debate our way. Our nation, our planet is going down the shythole while they say surge and we say surge and they say surge and we say surge and...

They really don't care, as frightening as that is, as long as they were right about the surge - which means that we were right before the surge about Rummy needing more troops to do what they shouldn't have been doing in the first place.

Is that INSANE enough for you?

Keep your eyes on the big picture or they win.

[danoj]

Dems do say that and Americans aren't listening. Dems are weak on security and the word is out. Dems are going to win this cycle not because Americans agree with there train of thought, but because the folks a punishing repubs for getting corrupt. Not to worry though ya think it's bad now wait till Dems run the show for a few years. Repubs will be back in the drivers seat before ya know it.

[Chad53916]

Yeah, it'll suck when those dems are driving the bus. Surplus money in the budget, pay down of our national debt and licking the wounds of our troops. It will suck not having all this fun on the credit card of my kids and their kids. And their kids. And their kids.... :(

Funny how your party only gives a crap about the life of an American until the umbilical cord is cut.

[flydoghead]

Whatever gets you to sleep at night

If Dems are weak on security then what is the alturnitive ?

Are we strengthened by the policies of the last 7 1/2 years ?

We are witnessing the results of the management skills of the Rebs.

[TheMastadon]

This post actually scares me

[rsaillant1]

Just a quick reminder to "danoj"

9-11 happened on the Republican watch. So much for the Democrats being weak on security.,­,,and it all went down hill after that point in time. End of story, well soon, like in November.

[SonnyBono]

Attention Mr. danoj - I understand that you just learned English as a second language today but what time today?

[meanguy]

"How about every time they say surge, we say access to medical care"
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----

3dtrix, that sounds EXACTLY like the obamessiah's strategy all along: they ask you about topic 'a', you babble some ignorant bumper sticker BS about topic 'b'

face it, the man was wrong about the surge, and lacks the guts to admit it

[recruitgal]

BO said the surge had an impact - how could it not? But he rightly points out that the broader impact was a result of a number of factors. He's also pointed out that the Iraq situation is a disaster, and that we're not fighting the right battle.

McC on the other hand is struggling to define what the Surge was and when it started, and is still hanging on to the completely false assumption that Saddam was producing WMDs - and he has only just realised that we're fighting another "war" in Afghanistan. If he can't grasp the basic facts, we're doomed.

[RJII]

What bumper sticker says anything on the above comment. If we're Obamessiah's, then you're a McCainretard.

Forget Iraq, America's infrastructure has crumbled. We've been surging ever since the first troops arrived. Surge, surge, surge is bankrupting us.
FYI - the violence is going back up.

[SKonnery]

The same way McBush lacks the guts admitting 4K + troops dead, 50K maimed with PTSD, and 100's of thousands Iraqi's dead and maimed is WRONG. For what profits for McCheney.

[flydoghead]

The man was Right about the surge
and has the balls to stand by his beliefs

I know that is shocking
but get use to it

[Kristen777]

Yeah, that's comforting - Yeaaaayyy the SURGE we launched to fix what WE BROK E is the spit & scotch tape that's holding together what was, at the very least a functioning nation, where people actually once had reliable electricity and there were a lot fewer unadoptable orphans, etc. etc.

[LenoDisruptors]

How come the issue isn't that McCain just made the completely insane statement that Saddam Hussein was pursuing weapons of mass destruction???!!! Has he fallen down and hit his head? What on earth is he talking about? The Senate Intelligence Committee just issued a report which backs up what everyone else has been saying for several years now, people like Elizabeth de la Vega in her book "U.S. v. Bush", the Center for Public Integrity in its tally of 935 false statements made by the top Admin. officials leading up to the invasion, and now Vincent Bugliosi in his book "The Prosecution of George Bush for Murder" -- that the Bush Admin. "misled" (i.e. LIED) about there being any threat from Hussein to the U.S. whatsoever. This war was begun under completely false pretences and even the MSM is aware of that. WHERE has McCain been? And can't he hurt himself with his head buried so deep in the sand?

[duze]

Obama should emphasize his thinking about the surge and then capitalize what our future role will be in Irag. Too much time has been spent on the surge. What else is going on, what else will go one.
The surge isn't the only thing we need to do to get out with dignity. And, John McCain is driving this point home, because it's the only point he has. Obama should concentrate on the future. General Wesley Clark stated: "the president is not beholding to the commanders on the ground, they are beholding to the president" therefore, McCains insistence that Obama should agree with Petreaus is wrong. The Commander in Chief is just that.

[SSF]

People would not be arguing the details of "surges" or "troops withdrawing with honor" if this war had not ben launched on the basis of blatant lies! Victory in this war can only be seen as honorable is one believes that the ends justify the means! There can be no honor gained in a war based on deceit!

[Ramirez]

That was an issue in the 2004 election. The issue in this election is where do we go from here.

[debrouillard]

Where do we go from here?
Well,we come home and leave the Iraqis at home. Remember,theres no place like home. US Military arent at home over there,The iraqis arent at home either because they feel like living in an invaded land.

[saltpeter]

where we go is take the funding of the war, invest t instead in r&d for alternative energy sources, turn over the jobs being done by American and foreign contractors to the Iraqis, an act that could lead to the expansion of wealth in Iraq and could serve to gut the militia movement because it could turn a young potential militia member into a hard working tax paing citizen. The fact that we do not talk about these options reveals that we either lack creativity, lack confidence in our ingenuity to come up with new ideas, lack confidence in the average Iraqi to be able to do the kind of job (for far less money) than the average KBR staff member, OR WE DON'T WANT A TRUE VICTORY that forces us to cut down the influence the oil industry has over our foreign policy and we don't want a true stability in the Middle East that would involve a economically sound nation that has control over it's own resources and it's own political structures. To belabor the "surge" is to belabor an US imperialism propping the last vestiges of a dying commodity.

[LettuceB1]

Exactly! McSame needs to get that in his head, and REMEMBER it!

[Tane]

I'm glad Blitzer addressed this, it would be nice if the rest of the media would stop giving McCain a pass on all issues re: National Security. I read an interesting article in the Jerusalem Post in which they point out how Obama compares favorably to McCain on Foreign Policy:

"In March, on his whirlwind visit to Israel, Republican presidential nominee John McCain, one of whose primary strengths is said to be his intimate grasp of foreign affairs, chose to bring along Sen. Joe Lieberman to the interview our diplomatic correspondent Herb Keinon and I conducted with him, looked to Lieberman several times for reassurance on his answers and seemed a little flummoxed by a question relating to the nuances of settlement construction.

On Wednesday evening, toward the end of his packed one-day visit here, Barack Obama, the Democratic senator who is leading the race for the White House and who lacks long years of foreign policy involvement, spoke to The Jerusalem Post with only a single aide in his King David Hotel room, and that aide's sole contribution to the conversation was to suggest that the candidate and I switch seats so that our photographer would get better lighting for his pictures."

I'd say Obama fair quite well!

[shelobo]

McCain sidestepped the question concerning 'Judgement ' on HIS vote FOR the war in the first place as always. In fact this whole Iraqi 'war' was supposed to LIBERATE the Iraqi people ,that has been done ,and the surge isn't the main reason violence dropped ,read Iraqi websites ,the PEOPLE of Iraqi decided to start fighting against the violence in their OWN villiages and cities,before the surge even happened..­We are supposed to be fighting in AFGANISTAN ,we don't have enough troops to fight all these wars !Inlistments are down and we need to get out of Iraq,because Afganistan is NOT going to be a cakewalk and we are going to need EVERY ALLY we can get to back our troops in Afganistan or the death toll will keep climbing and climbing .when we finally DO get back to the war that was supposed to be and became Bushs revenge against Sudan Hussien instead of the war that was supposed to find Bin Ladin .

[Diogenis]

I keep wanting to say...Well done Mr. President!

[Bluejay00234]

Yep.

[Pupadup4oBama]

Go ahead - do not be afraid - you speak the truth, grasshoppe­r...:)

[cobra7]

Me too..but I will wait until they get to Denver and eventally November which can't come soon enough.

[Heaphy]

Are these people really reporters? It seems like many of them see their jobs as parroting the daily Republican talking points and echoing the vapid arguments advanced by other pundits. What ever became of investigation, independent ideas and critical thinking skills?
- Jim Heaphy

[rosal]

Corporate World gave its marching orders to Corporate Media. Simple as that

[CocteausTwin]

NO they seem to be for the most part a bunch of cue card reading, water carrying creeps. I consider them very un-American for the disservice they do to our country. I would be embarrassed to be related to any of them except an extreme few.

[omahkohkiaayo]

Exactly. Obama could, for example mention the "post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy"; after this "therefore" because of this... Just because some dimunition of violence followed some aspects of the surge does not mean an event is "caused" by that which preceded it.

Or, Obama could ask: "Does putting Nivea skin cream on a syphillitic rash mean that the underlying cause of the rash is gone? Same for an aspirin for a brain tumor. Or he can ask them why do you ask me questions and then try to make me give your own answers? Or, challenge them and Petraeus to take a walk through Baghdad with an interpreter and no other persons or coverage if the surge has worked so well.

[rosal]

No War- No need for surge
O wins that argument hands down. And if the surge is so successful, why McDesperate doesn't want to bring the troops home NOW?
As long as one soldier is still in Iraq, the surge has not worked. Period

[Ramirez]

As long as one soldier remains in Germany...

[SonnyBono]

Yo, Cowboy, NO ONE IS SHOOTING AT OUR MILITARY IN GERMANY!!!

Or didn't you notice - I have been in Germany numerous times in the last thirty years and I never had to break out body armour or attack helicopters as back-up.

[polaris12]

Evan Wright in his book “Generation Kill,” reports that when the US forces arrived in Baghdad, their first tactic was to pit the Shias against the Sunnis. He says, “The Americans’ assumption seems to be that all they need to do in Baghdad is sit back and let the Shias clean house. Not only do the Americans tolerate this bloodshed, but at least one Marine commander … allegedly distributes stocks of confiscated AKs to Shia leaders who promise to use them to rout out the bad guys.” (p.328) When General Petreaus, took over, he changed tactics. As Nir Rosen reported earlier this year in Rolling Stone, the U.S. didn’t just add 30,000 more troops, it “essentially bribed the opposition, arming the very Sunni militants who only months ago were waging deadly assaults on American forces." Rosen says that in the Dora District, “the strategy of the surge seems simple: to buy off every Iraqi in sight. All told, the U.S. is now backing more than 600,000 Iraqi men in the security sector — more than half the number Saddam had at the height of his power.” In essence, the surge amounts to little more than “supporting a quasi-feudal devolution of authority to armed enclaves, which exist at the expense of central government­.," Of course, McCain will never admit that our own miscalculations fueled the insurgency. And why should Obama say that the surge has worked. What happens when the money stops?

[Oilygarch]

Ever since the very beginning of Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL), the only significant surge we have experienced has been in the number of dead and maimed (mostly civilian, and of those, mostly women and children); oh, and a great surge in oil prices too.

[Marjiecanuck]

If the outcome at a moment in time is an indicator of the success of this war REMEMBER the 'MISSION WAS ACCOMPLISHED 4 yrs back"

as a big picture will the surge have made a difference to the outcome of war... will it stop the bleeding of American economy?..­will it stop the hundreds and thousands of Iraqis still getting killed?... Does it make Americans safer?... Does it make all the collateral damage of war go away? does it stop Blackwater, Haliburton, cheney et all from getting rich by making American tax payers poor?... Will it free our great grand children of the debt incurred because of Iraq war?
After 4000+ American troop death, after 200000 American troops maimed physically and mentally, after 300000 or more Iraqis dead, after the wanton destruction of a country Iraq with no end in sight, after spending a TRILLION dollars with no GAIN to Americans what so ever ( but for the bloodsuckers who have gotten rich at taxpayers expense) after the loss of American prestige , economy and credibility , after strengthening Iran and China and Russia at our taxpayer expense, after creating millions of new Jihadis ready to destroy American interests.­... yes the surge ( along with all the other means deployed eg.extra money spent to bribe Iraqis) succeeded in bringing down troop casuality marginally­.for the next few weeks. .