Not a Gaffe: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of Iraq

John McCain made a mistake this evening, which as far as I'm concerned, disqualifies him from being president.  It is so appalling and so factually wrong that I'm actually sitting here wondering who McCain's advisers are.  This isn't some gaffe where he talks about the Iraq-Pakistan border.  It's a real misunderstanding of what has happened in Iraq over the past year.  It is even more disturbing because according to John McCain, Iraq is the central front in the "war on terror."  If we are going to have an Iraq-centric policy, he should at least understand what he is talking about.  But anyway, what happened.

On Katie Couric tonight McCain says:

Kate Couric: Senator McCain, Senator Obama says, while the increased number of US troops contributed to increased security in Iraq, he also credits the Sunni awakening and the Shiite government going after militias. And says that there might have been improved security even without the surge. What's your response to that?

McCain: I don't know how you respond to something that is as -- such a false depiction of what actually happened. Colonel McFarlane [phonetic] was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks. Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening. I mean, that's just a matter of history. Thanks to General Petraeus, our leadership, and the sacrifice of brave young Americans. I mean, to deny that their sacrifice didn't make possible the success of the surge in Iraq, I think, does a great disservice to young men and women who are serving and have sacrificed.

One problem.  The surge wasn't even announced until a few months after the Anbar Awakening.  Via Spencer Ackerman, here is Colonel MacFarland explaining the Anbar Awakening to Pam Hass of UPI, on September 29, 2006.  That would be almost four months before the President even announced the surge.  Petraeus wasn't even in Iraq yet.

With respect to the violence between the Sunnis and the al Qaeda -- actually, I would disagree with the assessment that the al Qaeda have the upper hand. That was true earlier this year when some of the sheikhs began to step forward and some of the insurgent groups began to fight against al Qaeda. The insurgent groups, the nationalist groups, were pretty well beaten by al Qaeda.

This is a different phenomena that's going on right now. I think that it's not so much the insurgent groups that are fighting al Qaeda, it's the -- well, it used to be the fence-sitters, the tribal leaders, are stepping forward and cooperating with the Iraqi security forces against al Qaeda, and it's had a very different result. I think al Qaeda has been pushed up against the ropes by this, and now they're finding themselves trapped between the coalition and ISF on the one side, and the people on the other.

And here is the NY Times talking about the Anbar Awakening back in March 2007.

The formation of the group in September shocked many Sunni Arabs. It was the most public stand anyone in Anbar had taken against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which was founded by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

And here is Colin Kahl in Foreign Affairs:

The Awakening began in Anbar Province more than a year before the surge and took off in the summer and fall of 2006 in Ramadi and elsewhere, long before extra U.S. forces started flowing into Iraq in February and March of 2007. Throughout the war, enemy-of-my-enemy logic has driven Sunni decision-making. The Sunnis have seen three "occupiers" as threats: the United States, the Shiites (and their presumed Iranian patrons), and the foreigners and extremists in AQI. Crucial to the Awakening was the reordering of these threats.

This is not controversial history.  It is history that anyone trying out for Commander in Chief must understand when there are 150,000 American troops stationed in Iraq.  It is an absolutely essential element to the story of the past two years. YOU CANNOT GET THIS WRONG.  Moreover, what is most disturbing is that according to McCain's inaccurate version of history, military force came first and solved all of our problems.  If that is the lesson he takes from the Anbar Awakening, I am afraid it is the lesson he will apply to every other crisis he faces including, for example, Iran.

This is just incredibly disturbing. I have no choice but to conclude that John McCain has simply no idea what is actually happened and happening in Iraq. 

Update: It gets even better. Marc Lynch points me towards an article (PDF) that Col. MacFarland wrote summarizing his experiences in Anbar and how they helped turn the war in the Sunni parts of Iraq and started the Anbar Awakening. This is essentially the official military history. The timeframe he discusses is June 2006-February 2007. The first surge troops were just arriving as MacFarland and his men redeployed out of Anbar.

Comments

[Nonamnesiac]

McCain is going to get political credit for the surge causing a decline in US casualties no matter what anyone says and no matter what the facts are. Prior to the surge the US was losing 20-25 dead per week and six months after the surge started US dead was down to between 5 and 10 per week and it's even fewer now. People think the "Anbar reawakening", and whatever other spin people want to put on it all happened because the US increased the number of troops and firepower in Iraq. And that's what most will believe no matter how progressives try to dissect the facts.

But the people also know that in order to keep casualties lower the US must spend billions per month and continue to lose lives and limbs and they don't think any outcome in Iraq is worth the cost. They want all troops out now, safely and no more US money spent on the war. They realize that Iran has won the war and that Maliki, Sadr, Sistani, etc. are all pro-Iran leaders and that Ahmadinejad gets a hero's welcome in Baghdad while our leaders have to sneak into a fortified zone with heavily armed escorts.

So if Obama wants to win, he has to say all US contractors and troops out now, safely and we'll watch the region from the decks of the militarily devastating Fifth and Sixth fleets.

[janvoght]

since we were not justified to start a war and force coercive democracy (questionably sustainable) in Iraq (after being there for longer than WW2) accomplishing what, having no definable vision for victory, no exit strategy, and being characterized as the biggest blunder in our recent history, maybe it is time to focus on a more productive strategy in our foreign policy, no?
obama '08

[Nonamnesiac]

Yes, and that's why Obama was wrong for knowingly voting for Bush's war budgets, which included money for war crimes. Obama's being too cute by half -- trying to be on both sides of the issue. If he doesn't come out for immediate, safe withdrawal of all US troops and contractors as the only way to end this debacle -- if it's a debate between McCain's 150,000 troops and Obama's 50,000 troops indefinitely in Iraq along with the contractors, McCain will win that debate -- as he'll argue that fewer troops prior to the surge meant more US casualties. More US casualties is the one result the American people will not accept.

[freecasey]

Watching Brokaw with Obama this morning, it is clear the MSM has neither the time nor the desire to understand and communicate the multiple reasons for and nuance behind the current conditions in Iraq. Nothing new there. It's downright un-American to think Iraqi citizens tired of seeing thier homes destroyed and families shattered have played as big a role -- or bigger -- in the turnaround as 20,000 more troops thrown into a sea of 140,000 troops did.

McCain has the advantage of simplicity on this issue. MSM and Joe Voter can understand Surge=Success, or maybe even A+B=C. But A+B+C+D+E+F=G is unfathomable. Complexity is Obama'a achille's heel.

Make McCain get complex: "John McCain infers that 20,000 more troops did what the other 140,000 failed to do. That is wrong. Today's success was a team effort between our brave American men and women and Iraqi families tired of seeing their lives and dreams destroyed by al-Qaida."

[barriosbabe]

I feel like a lone voice but when we will force both Bush, and both candidates, to talk honestly about the multi billion dollar permanent bases in Iraq??! Which are there for oil!

[leftLibertarian]

Iraq was never a direct threat to the US. In fact, it was an ally during the Reagan Administration. The present US occupation of Iraq is illegal and had lead to the death of thousands of Iraqis and US troops.

So the bottom line is Bush and Cheney are criminals and the Democrats are complicit in their crimes.

[swift_goat_pet_for_truth]

As a political junkie, I have been watching the whole presidential process.
As a progressive, I supported Dennis Kucinich from the beginning, because I agreed with his policies.
I also knew he had no chance. But I watched.

I watched as McCain emerged as the best of a motley crew of GOP candidates.
I watched Obama take away the nomination from Hillary, not because she blew it, but because he was better.

I watched how McCain has struggled since, for many reasons, even with Corporate Big Money.
I watched how Obama has consolidated his position with grassroots support.

I know that this campaign is the biggest enterprise McCain has ever managed.
I know that this campaign is the biggest enterprise OBama has ever managed.

It is exceedingly clear which of these two I would select as the leader of my country.
Mr McCain has no organizational or administrative skills. He has no vision. He has no plan. Not for his campaign. Not for this country. He does have the Corporate Media in his pocket.

Mr. Obama has my vote.

[Scarllatti]

John McCain's "presidency" will be a nightmare to the Jewish nation. QUOTE ME!!. Any Jewish-American contemplating voting for McCain should first renounce his/her American citizenship and go to Israel to live for just a week to feel the real and present danger posed by the Katusha rockets fired by Hamas terrorists into Israeli homes. We should get the real feelers of who best serves the security of Israel from the Israelis than those who have dual citizenship and live within the "comfort" and "security" provided on mainland America. Bellicosity, tough-talk and military superiority has not solved these problems for over 60 years and never will. We need a smart American policy that will give real peace and security to Israelis and those teaming Palestinians (not Hamas) who also want to live in peace with their Jewish neighbors.
Just reminds me of Cuban-Americans (especially the older folks) who will rather see all their kith and kins starve to death in mainland Cuba than to see "Castro benefit" from whatever murky old-fashioned ideas that had been sown into their psyche by those who still benefit from that political ideology.

[Heavy]

Pesky facts

[Cymbeline]

Surely, there are quotes from McCain a year ago March or so about how the "surge" hadn't really started yet because all the new troops weren't in place.

[daddysboy]

mccain has allied himself with the same people that still insist there were nuclear bombs in Iraq and that al qaeda was in Afghanistan when we blew that whole country to high hell; what did you expect? mccain is believing his own propaganda and what's worse is that he is on the friggen defense subcommittee - you'd think he would be MORE knowledgeable and accurate. In fact, for someone as briefed as he is, the mistaken geography was quite inexcusable and way too telling of his mentality regarding the entire region.

[ScottontheSpot]

Another good source would be the Mother Jones' magazine Iraq timeline - first published a few months ago, and now updated regularly on their site. It clearly shows the Great Awakening occuring well before any surge. The impact of the Awakening cannot be overstated. Not only did our forces not have to fight these insurgent groups when they turned against al-qaeda, but these extra forces - who knew the location and methods of al-qaeda better than anyone - added far more numbers of fighters against al-qaeda than the 20,000 soldiers of the U.S. surge. It is the 100,000 member Iraqi surge that has turned the tide far more than the 20,000 U.S. soldiers. It's also worth remembering that McCain asked for 38,000 more soldiers, not 20,000 - and he was disappointed he only got that many, another fact he chooses to forget in his revisionist history.

[lldorward]

What absolutely infuriates me is the fact that none of these kinds of issues are discussed on any political news shows except perhaps Countdown with Keith Oberman. And what"s equally egregious is that none of the anchors or interviewers know enough to challenge the false representations and factual mistakes made by McCain and his surrogates. The most outrageous lies go unrebutted and the most shocking mistakes go unchallenged. I used to really like the MSNBC political lineup, but I"ve had it. The only way I"ll watch anything on MSNBC other that Oberman again is if they give Rachel Maddow a show; she"s the only one smart enough to conduct a real interview. I can"t stand the superficial patty-cake from Chris Mathews anymore (whose show should be changed from Hardball to Spitball), or any of their "news" coverage which has abandoned the only attempts at investigative journalism they used to have when they pulled David Schuster from his special reporting and turned him into a another anchor-puppet.

[barriosbabe]

What about this?!

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jzxqARN0Huv38n5pgDfdBRwuoiZgD925QUBO0

It's all over the nefarious MSM!

[JXJASON]

I find the best source of news to be the internet. Like this excellent article.

If you would like some interesting opinions and facts about the US., go to The Asia Times, Arab News, CBC, Washington Post and other sources. Naturally, keep reading The Huffingtonpost.

John McCain is a very poor choice for President for a lot of reasons...like:

1. no common sense.
2. poor speaking ability.
3. lack of awareness of what the problems are.
4. no concept on how to solve those problems.
5. MCCAIN IS A WAR MONGER. ( Remember bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran).
6. McCain's McBush policies. ( Remember McCain's goal about doing away with Social Security).
7. McCain cannot, effectively, express himself.

In November, vote for Barack Obama and Get Out The Vote.

OBAMA 08

[biglover]

I am always amazed that the republican trolls are conspiciously absent from any stories showing the obvious failings of McCain and Co. The only time they rear their ugly heads is when the story is focused on Obama

[Heavy]

That is the fundamental problem with defending republicans. One has to avoid reality.

[lisakaz2]

Indeed, it is NOT a gaffe. It is a deliberate attempt at distortion in order to continue to sell this "war." It's propaganda.

[dagnew]

Many voters won't or can't wrap their heads around this, and only hear the 'surge' has been working, period. I can't see the MSM (maybe KO) wrapping their heads around it either. Thus, another pass for Mickey C.

[DLeeA]

Indeed, but don't expect him to stop crowing that they all love Mr. O.

[jochebed]

Mr Wolberg, you can't be serious that "shopping malls and a market for iPods and HBO" constitute "progress" in Iraq. The US and the UK were lured there on false pretences, and the Iraqis want their country back, including the oil and the archaeological sites, they have serious problems there: The refugees (up to four million displaced), up to a million people dead as a result of the invasion, no stable electricity grid, a huge proportion of men unemployed, and women discouraged from working outside the house - where are the customers for those "shopping malls"?
Ever been in an open-air food market, anywhere from France to Turkey to Egypt, or even in Ben Yehuda Street? People don't need "shopping malls". Some people don"t even want an "American way of life", but have more pressing priorities, like staying alive.
Given that "we" shouldn't be there at all and have far outstayed any welcome we might once have had, AND McCain gets elementary facts wrong about not only Iraq and Afghanistan but, much worse, about the people who live there and who are entitled to run their own affairs without our interference - given that, there is no "victory". You can't have it both ways " were they liberated or were they conquered? And because the Iraq invasion was a bait-and-switch operation: nothing to do with 9/11 or the grandiose "war on terror", when Mr Maliki says "Leave!", we leave. AND apologise for the wrong we did there.

[Anyse]

Hear hear!!

I always ask what Bush means by "conditions on the ground." If they can tout "shopping malls and an iPod store," then, what the hay, it must be time to leave Iraq post haste! Conditions on the ground could not be better! It is time to heed the words of the Iraqis and their leaders (who seem to have "grown a couple"!) and, respectfully, leave Iraq. Leave NOW!! Get the hell out of there. Stop embarrassing me and all other Americans who wish to claim that moniker.

[C65]

RIGHT ON jochebed,
Above all don't forget what Clark said:"getting shot down in an airplane
does not make one qualified for president".Yes,we all appreciate John
McCain service and suffering,but let's not forget,he is not the only person
that has served this country and Clark took heat for what was the TRUTH,
and that's something for some reason REPULICANS have a problem with.
My grandson served 7 yrs.in the USAF in Chemical Warfare,but I wouldn't
vote for him to be President,just on that alone,if at all.