McCain Backs Obama's Iraq War Plan

Had history turned out otherwise on November 4, 2008, the approach to the economic recovery might be radically different.

But, in an indication of how drastically the debate has shifted in the last few years, Iraq war policy would be roughly the same.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), President Obama's campaign opponent, went to the White House Thursday for a briefing on the president's plan for a timetable for a troop drawdown in Iraq. Before heading down Pennsylvania Avenue, he said he was already largely on board.

McCain said he would not be advising the White House as to what he thought was the best plan, but rather hearing them out.

"They're going to present us their recommendations. It's their plan," he said. "From what I know about it, I agree with it."

For McCain, the plan has virtue because it is backed by the generals and the ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. "I like it best because it's what Ambassador Crocker and General [Raymond] Odierno and General [David] Petraeus also felt was a suitable strategy," said McCain.

That puts Obama and McCain in one camp and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who supports a smaller residual force, in another. Obama has suggested some 50,000 troops might remain in Iraq; Pelosi has said she hopes to see something in the range of 15,000.

The Huffington Post asked McCain, if he had been elected president, whether he would have implemented roughly the same plan that Obama intends to carry out in Iraq.

"Oh, I'm sure," he said, "because that's what our military and civilian leadership has recommended. I can't say exactly, but certainly it seems to me it's a viable strategy."

Comments

[MaryanneAZ]

Call me a cynic, but I think this is just McC.ain's roadshow of nonpartisanship. He wants to get out of the "no" crowd. It's theatre. There is no downside to this support, and no real upside either. It just sounds good. Hopefully, we Arizona folks will not be fooled by this seeming support of our President's agenda. Mc.Cain is always and only out for himself and his own agenda.

[dayala]

I wouldn't call you a cynic I would call it a realistic assessment based on factual accounts that the Repugs approval rating keeps tanking lower and lower and McCain sees the writing on the wall if he doesn't break from the downward slopping NOGOP pack and change course.

[jpmdevildog]

Weekly World News has received a tip from an anonymous source within the Obama Administration confirming allegations that President Obama used his close ties with alien organizations to abduct John McCain and replace him with a pod-person version.

This pod-McCain was grown to imitate the real John McCain but be far friendlier to the Obama Administration.

http://weeklyworldnews.com/alien-alert/6578/pro-obama-mccain-a-pod-person/

[freshnotbitter]

Terrorism here started when Bush left "residual" crusaders in Arabia.

It's not rocket science.

Dems always seem enthralled by their own doom. they launch worthy social programs that are always destroyed by foreign policy adventures of dubious value.

Truman and Korea.

Johnson's great society and viet nam.

Carter's 2nd term doomed by Iranian hostages.

Don't get me started on Clinton.

Eisenhower and Reagan got it. I like Ike. And we never cease hearing about the wonderful RR from the right.

Why do dems always step in the same s----pile, over and over and over again???

[libslayerguy]

What are you talking about? Ike was the last GOP president that actually lived in the real world. Since then it's been pure fantasy. Reagan was no Ike, buddy.

[KatDawgATL]

Reagan turned the CIA into "drug dealers" (gi-normous national security screw-up) and ruined (halted) the advancement of major city communities, ended millions of american lives, and provided "escape measures" to major criminals.

Eisenhower warned us about the rise of the "military industrial complex" -But the Grand Opportunist Party didn't listen.

Your biases are far less than honest.

[JonShank]

Carter didn't have a 2nd term.

[Fernando]

I'm just glad to see McCain is back to his old, erratic self.

I swear, this man is more interested to be seen as a "maverick" than making decisions out of conviction. It's not hard to see why some Republicans can't stand him.

[Citizen-Jane]

John McCain's support tepidly supports this plan. He stuck in a few jabs at the Commander in Chief.

[Actionmac]

Because McCain wanted to stay and ran on staying. Bush making the agreement to leave, because of Obama'a plan being seen as correct by the Iraq Gov., he was seen/proven WRONG thus he continues to jab.

[noradunn]

McCain, who has said that pulling out is not at option, that we might be in Iraq for a hundred years, that you can't tell the "enemy" you are leaving, now says he would have done the samebecause he says it's the military's plan. I think it's a compromise by the President, who plans on cutting military spending.

[StephCaster]

Why is this a surprize? Obama has adopted the Bush/McCain position of a permanent military occupation of Iraq (at 50,000 troop level) and called it "ending the war." It's not what I mean by ending a war: how about you?

[JonShank]

I guess one would have to define what a war is. There are U.S. military personnel in Japan and Germany, yet we are not at war with them. So, perhaps this is just a force to help keep the peace while the fledgling country gets its footing. I do hope that in the long run, Iraq is a nation that gets along with us and the world at large.

[Hallucinocynic]

The reasoning has been that US military forces in Japan and Germany provide a deterrence not against those countries, but potential adversaries in those theaters. Also, the presence in Japan provides support for the UNC in ROK, while US bases in Europe are part of NATO.

The same reasoning could be applied in Iraq but only if the force was considerably smaller than the projected 50,000 troops (e.g., there aren't 30,000 US troops in Korea).

[TheMuckraker]

Why cant Iraq military personnel maintain the peace?

Is really about the oil?

[Actionmac]

who cares what you and others that think like you think... it's OVER and the troops will be home.

The alternative was an open ended occupation of a situation that was going to bankrupt the US.

Remember when you talk about Obama taking the Bush/McCain tactic, that if not for Obama we would NOT be hearing of any draw down in troops of time table of the end of the occupation. All that is happening and what agreements bush made regarding draw down was because Obama hammered this plan since he ran for his senate seat.

[Graywolf48]

I'm a little confused here. If we're going to leave 50,000 troops, at what appear to be "permanent" bases in Iraq, isn't that the same as "open ended occupation"? Other than perhaps a reasonable sized Embassy compound like we maintain in other countries, why must we leave any troops at all? What if had left 50,000 troops at permanent bases in Vietnam, would that have been considered "ending the war?"

I want to bring all our troops home, leaving only the standard USMC Embassy detail, as is SOP in most countries we have diplomatic relations with. If we're maintaining troops and bases, sounds a little like occupation to me, especially when both the Iraqi people and government want us out.

[yhgtup]

StephCaster -- I'm already sick of people like you "bi***ng about the 50,000 troop occupation. It's what the military generals, who are over there by the way, reccommended! When's the last time you were in Iraq???

[ndnndpendent]

50,000 troops on the ground will make Obama look like a two face come re-election, which is obviously an inside job.

Also, if he feels the need to keep 50,000 over there; that shows he really doesn't trust his own team to advance Mid East diplomacy.

Obama must show his conviction. How hard is it?

[TheMuckraker]

I agree. I dont understand how your post got by the c e n s o r s.

Many of my dissenting posts have'nt.

[Ugonna]

who knew that this issue would end up being Obama's source of bipartisanship?

[TheMuckraker]

I did!

[TheMuckraker]

Just like the last 8 years of backslapping and pickpocketing, plundering, rape and murder....the genocide continues.

Dont look behind the curtain, behind the president!

[TheMuckraker]

The outrage will continue to be ignored.

[Schvenzlerman]

If Obama does not want to withdraw from Iraq, we must support him. He is our leader and he is wise. He may feel that we need to continue to occupy Iraq. There should be no questioning of his decisions. We elected him and he has a mandate. Move to another country if you disagree with any of his policies, or change your voter registration to Republican.

[truenortherner]

I certainly applaud your support of President Obama. But I find your rhetoric to be extremely dangerous. This is exactly the kind of belief system that endangers democracy and freedom of speech. You are supporting the same thinking that right-wing hawks demanded from people during the Bush administration.
We have a right, if not a duty, to question the decisions of our leaders and it must always be practiced.

[Just2stressed]

Well said!!!

[Graywolf48]

Curious, was your attitude and sentiment the same during the Bush years? Blind obedience and failure to question authority is what totalitarian regimes are all about. I blindly follow no leader. Patriotism and personal responsibility mandates that I question my government when I think it's wrong or disagree. And your tired, repulsive "love it or leave it" mentality makes me sick. In a representative democracy or republic, questioning authority is healthy and should be encouraged. That's why we're supposed to have a free press and freedom of speech and assembly. You obviously are very well schooled in American history and the Constitution. We have too many lemmings and ditto heads in the Republican tent, we don't need that in the Democratic tent as well. If you enjoy that type of lock step, "my way or the highway" dogma, I suggest YOU change your registration to the Republican party.

[cheesymacaroni]

I don't drink anybody's kool-aid. I voted for Obama because of his Iraq policy and I'm deeply disappointed by this "reassessment" and braced for several more kick the can down the road and stay the course announcements. It's not the sort of change I had in mind.

[ndnndpendent]

Wouldn't it just be easier for him to fulfill his campaign promises to end the war, like he said he was going to do, rather than all of us having to move?

If I knew our troops were still going to be there through the first two years of his term, I would have voted Republican, or better yet, not wasted my time to go vote at all.

[Thinkingclearly]

Any information on how many of those 110,000 contractors are sticking around to keep running up our deficits at outrageous prices for us and profits for Halliburton.

Find us some info on that, please HuffPo.

Thanks!

[TheMuckraker]

YES!!

[Clarabell]

This is probably just a strategy on the part of the Repubs. Another way for them to cause conflict and then be able to say the Dems are in disarray. Everything they do has a motive behind it.

[novowel4me]

You could look at that both ways.

[MNCurler]

You're right- and the Democrats do things simply out of the goodness of their hearts.

[cariintexas]

Now now now, did Baukman just text you from CPAC and tell you to say that. No? Then was it Normy?

[simplify]

Everybody, and that goes for the arm chair politicians here, stop second guessing our President.

[Graywolf48]

We have a responsibility to question and "second guess" our President. He is, after all an elected servant of the people, not our Fuhrer or "Dear Leader". Just who the hell are you to tell anyone to "stop" questioning the national leadership? Did you ever second guess a President when you thought he was wrong? Or are you one of those mindless, blind followers of authority?

[springsm]

Oh who cares what this man thinks. My gosh..he likes it because all of bush's cronies like it. McCain is so much a hasbeen and a wannabe at the same time. He is totally not important to anything.

[hortonhearsawho2]

Somewhat more Viable then say your running mate and your campaign johnny boy...

[Hank10303]

I'm fine with Speaker Pelosi pushing for a reduced force. She is not opposing our President but reminding him she will speak out when she believes more is needed. All I want from her is for her to remember who is President and if she shows him backbone like this she had better get real stiff for the republicans because the fight has just begun and the rethugs won't change. They will obstruct and hate all the way through 2010 until there are even fewer of them seated. McCain is stupid - he hopes to use this as part of his re-election bid. I sincerely hope his opponent reminds AZ that when President Obama first discussed troop withdrawal McCain said he was naive

[AirForce Vet]

Bringing our troops home from a non-provoked war (which was not declared and was initiated to stroke someone’s ego) is the number one priority. Bringing our men and women home safely is the second priority. Leaving a residual force with the rumored number of personnel (35,000 to 50,00 troops) is a bit disturbing, but I can see it for safety reasons. If the residual force is going to be used for safety reasons (protecting the rear), I am for that. I really would have hoped for a fewer number of troops.

On the other hand, if the troops are going to be used for more fighting or continued US presence, then I am totally against that. It all hell breaks loose in Iraq, I do hope that the administration and the Pentagon would do the right thing and that would be to get out yesterday. Bringing the troops home on our time schedule is our aim, but this may accelerated due to the actions of the Iraqi people. We must consider this.

[VPN]

I agree but also consider we have NO idea what Boo$h committed us too, behind closed doors, labeled secret to keep the American People unknowing. I am very confident that the President will do what's right and necessary.