McCain: Obama Seeks To 'Legislate Failure' In Iraq

LAS VEGAS — Republican John McCain on Saturday issued a scathing critique of Barack Obama's judgment and readiness to be commander in chief, telling a veterans' group his Democratic rival had tried to "legislate failure" in Iraq and placed his own ambition ahead of military success there.

Addressing the Disabled American Veterans convention here, McCain mocked what he called Obama's varying positions on the Bush administration's decision to send an additional 30,000 troops to Iraq last year. The GOP hopeful supported the so-called "surge" strategy, even as polls showed most voters opposed sending more troops into combat at the time.

Obama spoke out against the original invasion as an Illinois state senator and strongly opposed the subsequent troop increase in the U.S. Senate and on the campaign trail.

Since then, the surge has been credited with helping stabilize Iraq and reduce violence there. Obama has argued that it has not brought about the political reconciliation between rival Sunni and Shia factions needed to create lasting peace in the country.

But in a tacit acknowledgment that his original assessment of the troop increase may have proven incorrect, Obama's campaign removed criticisms of the strategy from its Web site last month.

Narrowly trailing Obama in national and many battleground state polls, McCain, a 71-year old decorated Navy veteran and member of the Senate Armed Services committee, has increasingly tried to portray the 47-year old Obama as lacking the experience and judgment to lead the country in a dangerous world.

Obama, in turn, has criticized McCain for supporting the original Iraq invasion which polls show many voters now consider a mistake. Recently, Obama, who has made Afghanistan a centerpiece of his anti-terrorism strategy, has said the protracted Iraq conflict has drawn needed resources away from Afghanistan where al-Qaida and Taliban forces have shown a resurgence.

"Senator McCain continues to be stubbornly committed to the Bush administration position of an indefinite military presence in Iraq, despite the fact that the Iraqi government is calling for a timeline, despite the fact that the Iraqis are sitting on tens of billions in oil surplus while our economy is struggling at home, despite the impact on our troops and despite the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan," Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan said.

Story continues below

In his speech, McCain said Obama had not only predicted the troop increase would not succeed but had taken steps to ensure its failure, saying Obama had tried to prevent needed funding for it.

"Not content to merely predict failure in Iraq, my opponent tried to legislate failure," McCain said.

Obama voted against one major military appropriations bill in May 2007, but otherwise has voted consistently for funding to support the war.

McCain also renewed his criticism of Obama's call for a timeline to remove troops from Iraq, even as the U.S. and Iraq are near an agreement to pull American combat troops from the country by October 2010.

McCain later told The Associated Press that he believed the agreement being negotiated was not a timeline, as advocated by Obama.

"It will be notional and aspirational dates, but it will be based on conditions, I know that," McCain said. "They will be times that we hope they can be out by. They will be based on conditions on the ground, not according to hard deadlines."

___

Associated Press Writer Kathleen Hennessey in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

Comments

[Viper]

No, Obama seeks to legislate the end to 8 years of total, absolute failure.

Is the Iraqi Parliment seeking to legislate failure...?

Whats failure and whats vicotry... who surrenders to us or who do we surrender to...

3 Trillion bucks and for what? ... A radical Islamic Theocracy loyal to Iran and a get out of Iraq card for not so free?

Regards

[Driver125]

Yes, that's right John, it's just that simple. It's like two boxes sitting on the table before Obama. One says VICTORY on the wrapper and the other says DEFEAT. And for some inexplicable reason Obama has chosen DEFEAT. Complete nonsense. Please try to say something before the end of the campaign that makes a little bit of sense--anything at all--just to prove that you can do it.

[stanjz]

We won the war. Senator McCain has a one track mind when it comes to war.

Digg this.
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Republicans_and_miltary_men_on_John_McCain

[talkingclock]

MCain does not even sound coherent or as if he has a command on the issues at hand and by his own admission the economy is not his strength..

[sher2x4]

Remenber he bombed women and children from 20,000 ft.

[crease]

"Obama voted against one major military appropriations bill in May 2007, but otherwise has voted consistently for funding to support the war", to bad Mcwars can`t vote this good for his fellow Veterans.Why his he consistently making FALSE accusations about Obama and the MSM does not or is not picking him apart?As I have said before senator McCain and his staff are sad sad little people over there on the right........

[Rjmartinelli]

McCain votes still?

[zippywpinhead]

he didn't the entire month of July- which makes it pretty hypocritical for him to be scolding the Senate for going on vacation in August...

[Seral]

Well said: "It will be notional and aspirational dates, but it will be based on conditions, I know that," McCain said. "They will be times that we hope they can be out by. They will be based on conditions on the ground, not according to hard deadlines."

Obama is dreaming when he says he will call the troops back to home soon. The conditions in Iraq may deteriorate faster than anyone can think of, and, no matter what you think of after what happened there, it is the responsibility of the US in government to stabilize the conditions in Iraq before leaving there. Obama knows that, and so does the people around him. That is why he took a step back from his sharp claims. And, I can say the same for McCain. I don't think he wants the troops there more than anyone in this country, but, the conditions right now require them to stay. Because, any kind of cruel fate that awaits the people of Iraq after US makes a sudden escape from the scene will be considered their responsibility. I doubt any President will want to be remembered as the cause of such tragedy after being the source of this mess, and especially if it can avoided.

[TN]

Two Billion a week in unsustainable. We can not do it. Sorry bush and cheney should have thought of that before they attacked. This is a republican war. Maybe all those that voted for republicans can open their wallets and pay. Iraq has money, they need to fund it from here.

[Seral]

The question is if you leave now and will be forced to come back later on, with no one to compensate at the time, will you be able to afford it any better than you can right now? It is unfortunate that someone with a brain like Bush was literally first asked to open a Pandora's box, and then supported to keep it open as long as he can. I think you should not expect a lot, cause neither Obama nor McCain can give you a valid promise on what they will actually do. I would like to learn from both Obama and McCain what they actually plan to reach there before making that decision to bring back the troops. I think that part is still not clear.

[klmebane]

IMHO, it is not our responsibility to "supervise" a civil war. we could be there for decades! we can't afford that, our country will collapse before that happens. yes, we made the region more unstable with our reckless invasion, but the solution for peace is a diplomatic/political one, not a military one. our troops can't advance that process any more than a religious group can make every single person in a country agree with them. our presence is part of the reason for the violence. the iraqis don't want us there, they have made that clear, and many of the insurgents fighting now are trying to liberate themselves from our occupation. the most expeditious route to a meaningful reconciliation in that country starts with a withdrawal of our troops. the fact that a sovereign nation (sovereignty being a cornerstone of the bush ideal) has asked us to leave their country should be enough. they have every right to ask us to leave and to expect us to listen to them!

[Witchitalineman]

Zip it Senator McCain.

[kallopolis]

The only failure being legislated is the Bush-McCain economic policy: Destroy the dollar, shift the tax burden onto the middle and lower class, ship American jobs over seas, feed Grover Norquist and the K Street gang.

[wndrwrthg]

mccains idea of military victory is to pass on information to the enemy on exchange for favorable treatment.

[PAposter]

That's what he means when he says, "I know how to win wars", of course he has never won a war, nor participated in one that was won.

[zippywpinhead]

in all fairness, he never said which side he'd win it for...

[Bettysdad]

Actually, McCain has never participated in any war whatsoever.

He's participated in many war crimes, but never a war.

Some Republican is going to post "how can he commit war crimes if he wasn't in a war?"

Go learn about war crimes.

[TN]

Saddam Hussain is dead, we won, now let's get the he!! ot of there.

[PAposter]

I believe Osama Bin Laden is dead, as well.

[TN]

That's what Benazir Bhutto said before she was killed in Pakistan.

[iswideopen]

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!

[phughez]

It seems McCain wants war to be the centerpiece of American politics--so that he can get elected. That's why the Iraq War was created to begin with--a political tool--political posturing, to divide voters, and mobilize a significant block to keep neo-cons in power.

[Seral]

I think his feeling is different than simply wanting. McCain sees the matters with Iraq to be more important than what problem you can come up within the states. And, as a war veteran, his position is quite understandable. And, I would have started to look at differently at him if he said otherwise. It would be nothing more than Obama changing positions on when to bring the troops back home. In other words, simply politics. And that is what they have been playing. It is your choice to decide on which has the higher priority, solving the problems inside and forgetting about Iraq, which may come hunt down you worse because of potential problems occurring there creating a domino effect on your economy and the world economy. Or, finishing what you have started in Iraq and trying to get rid of that problem first so that you can start concentrating on the real problems here. Obama and McCain differ in their priorities, and the voters have to see which would benefit US the most before making the best decision.

[klmebane]

a solution in iraq is not one that can be found with bullets and bombs. our troops can't help the iraqi government function, they can only die and kill. perhaps we can leave, if they ask us to, some troops for security purposes but otherwise what they need from us is aid, diplomats, and engineers to help with the rebuilding process.

no one is speaking about forgetting iraq or the mayhem we've caused there. your assertion about the "domino effect" on our economy and the world economy is false because there is already an effect being felt on those economies. we have zero authority to try to tell another country how to govern itself while our own country is in such ruins. fixing our domestic problems takes precedent to everything else because if things aren't straight at home we can't expect to succeed abroad. our economy is in the toilet, unemployment is rising, gas prices are out of control, our military is strained to near breaking, people are losing their homes left and right, and our infrastructure is crumbling around us. a successful campaign of any kind is unlikely with a weak country backing it.

the most benefit to the U.S. comes from taking care of our nation, not from trumped up threats of "we kill 'em over there so they don't come here."

[phughez]

Invading Iraq triggered its own domino effect. As for priorities, I'll finish what I started, not what Bush started, thank-you.

[SaintZak]

Its one thing for people who read the Huffington Post and the like to scoff, but this sort of thing does resonate and it sets the debate. Obama and the Democrats need to hit back hard, and they;re not doing it. I don't get it. I wasn't expecting a repeat of 2000 and 2004, but that's what this sure looks likes. McCain is such a flawed candidate on so many levels I can't believe the Democrats are allowing him such a free ride.

[repearwo]

Obama is being civilized. A poll the other day had McCain's negatives increasing dramatically. Obama's reactions being calm and not heavy handed are keeping his negatives down. \

Look Obama knocked out the most formitable candidate he will face, Hillary Clinton, my guess is he will dispatch McCain as well. IT is not boxing a knock out now will not win, it is a timed sport and he needs to hold back for the last quarter or inning. He has to play strong all the way to November.

[soapington]

"Legislate failure"? What, exactly, does McConstipated think he means by this? One of the main differences between these candidates is that one of them understands what comes out of his mouth and means what he says, while the other mouths slogans and talking points that he doesn't understand or believe.

The rest of the world looks on in wonder and disbelief as the US struggles to decide whether to vote for a highly intelligent, well-informed and lucid candidate, and a confused, ill-tempered old man who demonstrates his ignorance every time he opens his mouth.

[soupson52]

The world looks on in disbelief... wonderful concise statement.

[PAposter]

Brilliant!

[StillAmused]

"a confused, ill-tempered old man who demonstrates his ignorance every time he opens his mouth", following in the footsteps of a confused, ill-tempered middle-aged man who demonstrates his ignorance every time he opens his mouth.

The rest of the world looks on in abject terror.

[donaldw6]

The rest of the world hasn't been subjected to anesthetizing treatments by our national media.

[StillAmused]

The dullard is an arsonist who thinks containment of the inferno to the top few floors is a big improvement.

[JeanPaulSatire]

Actually, he's trying to contain the the inferno to the BOTTOM few floors.

[StillAmused]

Touché.

(but I'm wrestling with which scenario is more patently ludicrous!)

[ReelBusy]

Gotta accuse Obama of "legislating failure" because McCain can't define victory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuAa7IGVTGw

[marthlois]

Obama Campaign should aggressively point out that while he's in Hawaii, McCain is getting press about how his days are so long and how he's never off the campaign trail! What nonsense. The Wa Post even did that article and let McCain go on and on about his "hours". Didn't talk about the weekends off for BBQing much. He had such a long period of time during the democratic primaries to prepare, campaign, etc. He was lazy! And now the catching up doesn't come easy for a 72-yr. old.