Much has been made in the Democratic primary over which candidate has passed or failed the Commander-in-Chief test. Yet, it's neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton who hasn't passed that test. It's John McCain, who has now failed that test twice.
If I was drawing up the Commander in Chief test, I can think of two questions that would be on there. First, what's the difference between Sunni and Shia. Second, who commands what in our military?
Just yesterday, John McCain seemed to say that General Petraeus is the top military commander of our Armed Forces, telling the Associated Press that he wouldn't shift the focus of the military from Iraq to Afghanistan "unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that."
Petraeus, of course, is our commander of forces in Iraq. That's it. He's not responsible for Afghanistan, or our regional commitment, or our global commitments. As a Commander in Chief, McCain should know that there are people much more qualified to speak to our global strategy than Petraeus -- including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of Defense, and the CENTCOM commander.
Of course, this is all a side-point, because the Commander in Chief makes these decisions, ultimately, not one General, as Senator McCain seems to be saying.
It sounds to me like Senator McCain has become confused because of the White House strategy. The White House, of course, has sent General Petraeus to Capitol Hill a number of times, and tried to paint it as an overall assessment of the global war on terror. If they were serious, they'd would have long ago sent the CENTCOM commander up for days upon days of hearings, followed by General McNeill, who could talk about the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, followed by General Petraeus.
Either way, this is the second big flub by Senator McCain in a month, on very key, simple matters, which a Commander in Chief should know.
This is not to take away from Senator McCain's service -- he's a war hero and deserves all the admiration in the world for his service. But some war heroes, obviously, are not prepared to be Commander in Chief. Not when they've failed the Commander in Chief test.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Choir here, Jon, let's hope most of OUR troops want to rebuild a ready military, provide proper veteran disability and GI benefits, and DON'T vote against their own self-interest in this election.
McCain DOES NOT support veterans!
Senator McCain is honorable man. I believe he believes he is telling the truth. I don't doubt that he considers his idea in the best interests of the United States. All of those attributes make him qualified to to be President of the U.S.. Having said I believe he is wrong on the issues. However, given the choice between somebody I trusted but didn't agree with or somebody I distrusted but didn't agree with - I would take the person I trust any day of the week.
If John MC Cain becomes our president, I do hope Condi Rice is on his ticket. She will be able to help him with issues he needs some brushing up on.
Come on Condi, the country needs you.
This is only if Obama can't win.
Our club here of 62 people can not stand Hilary.
Mc Cain they say doesn't seem to know much, about certain problems stiring in our country.
Is it possible he's NOT as sharp as the chimp???
Bill Clinton pardoned Patty Hurst a bank robber. His brother Roger for crooked business .
What makes you think the Clinton's aren't all in the same operation? They saw nothing wrong with Patty Hurst staying in jail for bank robbery.
Hilary has paid people to say these things. There crooked and will get votes any way they can.
LIes and more lies. A smearing tape to try and convince people any way they see fit.
Obama didn't make 10 million. Nor did president Bush.
McCain, as President, would do exactly as Bush has done: Get rid of every high level commander who happens to disagree with 'the mission'. Voices of dissent, voices of reason, are essential. Bush should be ashamed for letting Fallon go.
And note to fellow trolls: Make sure not to let anyone call this a 'war'. It ceased to be a war when the Iraqi army was defeated and Iraq's leaders captured and killed. This is now (and has been for some time) an occupation. Call it that.
McCain doesn't know who commands what in our military?
If John McCain is going to continue the GW Bush war campaigns, it is quite appropriate that he knows as little as GW.
This was a well-thought, well-wrought article, till you got to the last paragraph. Much too much is made of McCain's horrendous military experience. It certainly does show that he has more mettle than most of us think we have, but it also explains his stubbornness & his overreliance on military solutions. Bush doesn't have a good excuse for his own inability to change course, but the effect is the same: stay in Iraq till we 'win' & threaten to bomb, bomb bomb Iran at any cost to America & to the world. Almost everyone would come out of McCain's Viet Nam experience with serious psychological effects, & McCain has, too. If we recognize him for his service, as we should, we should also recognize that that same service appears to have rendered him less fit, rather than more fit, for the job of President. True, it isn't fair. But it seems to be a fact.
But?!?!?!
He bombed his own carrier, then got shot down, look at his experience, he is the modern day reincarnation of Patton, Grant, and Washington all rolled into one!
Aaror said:
"He bombed his own carrier"
Wow - that's one of the better clueless distortions I've seen all day.
Please, tell us so we can all understand how John McCain bombed his carrier? The facts are that Lieutenant McCain was sitting in his *A-4* awaiting clearance to launch when an electrical malfunction caused a zuni missile to fire from a parked *F-4*. ie, the ordnance was deployed from a type of plane John McCain didn't even fly.
.... just clueless.
Heh Heh, Look at what you guys are coming up with as ammo against McClain. Somehow the Rezkow , Ayres, Wright, elitism, vacuousness, lack of substance, and inept legislative record of Obama would seem a little more damaging.
Jon and Paul,
I know this is OT, but please consider a column on the following:
Hidden Danger: Soldiers Dying From Electrocution
A Dozen Soldiers Have Died From Accidental Electrocution in Iraq, Says Congressman
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4489783&page=1
"[The mother of a soldier who died in January 2008] claims that KBR had been aware of the problems with the electrical system at the complex since February 2007, citing reports from the contractor and the Army's Criminal Investigation Division she was shown during meetings with Army personnel."
Eleven plus months of prior notice?
As a Professional Engineer let me say, this isn't war, it's CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE.
You are absolutely correct, it is CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE!!!! Any mother who let that happen to a child would get the DEATH SENTENCE.....NO MISTAKE, there is more than criminal negligence in this....
And while McCain is shoving his feet in his mouth so often it looks like he's trying to march right out of his ass, the national press is having an orgy over Obama's "bitter" comment. Made all the more bizarre, when the majority of the Americans asked say either it's true, or they don't think it's important.
The press used to be our watchdog. Now they're a neutered toy poodle with a rhinestone collar stuffed in some Wall Street maven's handbag.
Sunni, Shiite, Viet Cong.... same diff.
2nd try - maybe I'll get through this time??
Capt Soltz,
Seriously, that is your qualification test for CINC ... being able to recognize two sects of a religion and knowing the entire command organizational structure of the military?
If this is the case, well, we're gonna need some new candidates.
Given all your experience as a field-grade, this is really the best criteria you can generate?
Cyn 101:
Are you kidding? Yeah, you are ... pretty good one. Like you actually believe it's not important that McCain, after more than 5 years, should know who we're fighting and why, and who's in charge of that fight.
Yeah, good one.
I mean, Bush didn't know the difference either -- and look how that turned out. Oh, never mind. don't ... er... look over there.
Did I tell Barack said people were bitter?
jbatch,
By Senator McCain stating that he would shift forces away from Iraq only when the Operational commander in Iraq agreed they were no longer needed, well, only a subjective and biased viewpoint would conclude that Senator McCain was unaware of who is in charge of that fight.
Or are you suggesting that it is totally inappropriate for the CINC to include the analysis of one of CENTCOMs subordinates in such a decision?
Sunni, Shiite, Viet Cong... same diff.
Pay attention after five years of war, McCain still doesn't know shit.
Obviously Soltz is exaggerating...
But, the larger points he makes -- McCain's serious blunders re: Iraq -- are highly disturbing.
We are told this is John Surge McCain's special-pet issue -- how many times has he met Patraeus in Iraq? -- yet, he continually demonstrates an inability to keep these facts straight.
I really wonder if McCain is mentally sound.
What other fiction might be playing in his mind...
Maybe he thinks Jimmy Carter is meeting with Medeterranean-cuisine students in Berkeley?
Might the home foreclosure crisis be attributed to a slowdown in Oklahoma bulldozer manufacturing? Could Katrina be that rap-artist who botched the National Anthem at an Astros game?
How long before he's asking al-Malaki, "when is bingo night?"
McCain's inability to read his own speeches -- even personal anecdotes contained in them -- isn't helping him dispell these indications of neural cobwebs.
Jon you're stretching with this one; your post is weak at best, bordering on tilting at windmills. Are you so desperate to get your candidate's foot out of his mouth that you"re willing to resort to manufacturing gaffes to avert attention?! OK, I'll play. Since you libs are in the habit of clarifying your candidate's remarks, let me take a page from your own playbook and "clarify" what McCain said with respect to Gen Petraeus. In response to a question on shifting troops to Afghanistan McCain said, "I would not do that unless Gen. Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that..." As the US Commander in Iraq, it is Petraeus"s call as to when the situation in Iraq is stable enough to allow forces assigned to him to be utilized elsewhere or sent home. Jon, as a military man you should know that Gen Petraeus has OPCON of all forces assigned to the war in Iraq. That means there are only two people who can take forces away from him, the Sec of Defense and the President--not the Chairman JCS or the CENTCOM commander. Therefore, what McCain said was exactly right. As for mixing up Sunni and Shia, point taken--it"s an easy thing to do and besides, I would be willing to bet that at least half of Congress doesn"t know the difference.
although it seemed that way a year ago, half of Congress isn't running for President. As for the rest, aren't we finding out every day how *Touchy* people are in this country.
Imagine how bitter the Iraqis are and then imagine how they feel when a candidate for American president calls them the enemy even if it is a mistake.
How about this for a Commander-in-Chief test....
Who has a comprehensive and viable strategy to promote and facilitate a sustainable political solution in Iraq that will allow for the withdrawal of US forces without leaving the chaos of a failed state behind and the need for another generation of troops to return at a later date?
Oops...THEY ALL FAIL!!!
I don't suppose we're missing Joe Biden yet, are we? Or, better yet, regretting that we didn't pay any attention to him while he was still in the race?
Alas, Biden.
McBush. That is the term that is used to describe McCain.
If you were Bush sitting in the oval office watching the campaigns,
and you could influence the outcome, would you go for someone
strong? Nope, you would look at McCain. He has one strong point,
and that is military service. Patriotism is very big these days.
McBush ... hrmm, catchy. Follows our marketing strategy of prepending "Mc" to all of our branding.
Please, do us the favor of applying one of your other fast-food slogans - don't we deserve a break today?
No, he's used his POW status to his advantage, which I don't fault him for. Now he's using it to try take over as much power as he can, so he's used up all his credit on that one with me. I admire him for nothing, period, the end.
AMEN
Yes, I can just imagine a young Lieutenant McCain in his rack thinking:
hrrm maybe I can get shot down, hopefully survive and be captured. If I remain in captivity for a while, let's hope for five years - yeah, that will be a winning strategy - I can milk that all the way to the presidency.
Funny, that was what Kerry was charged with in 2004. Did you complain then?
And if I wanted to be snarky, I would point out McCain was incompetant, because he got caught. But I do respect McCains service. I just don't want him to be Bush's 3rd term. I would have voted for him in 200, but he has lost my respect since then. Perhaps if he doesn't win this time, he can run in 2012 on the Conneticut For Lieberman Party (of one/two)
sd4david said:
"Funny, that was what Kerry was charged with in 2004. Did you complain then?"
Actually, yes - I did complain about the banter from both sides in 2004 - to the point that I started to socialize the slogan, "If who's the best war hero is your criteria, write-in John McCain"
I also do not want this to be Bush's 3rd term - I wanted John McCain in 2000 and 2004. Still, I think your assertion that John McCain would be Bush 3rd is just as shaky as my assertion that Obama would be Carter's 2nd. I do, however, stand by my assertion that Senator Rodham *would* be Bill's 3rd term.
Actually, I can think of a young ENSIGN McCain lying in his bunk thinking, "Gee, I crashed two aircraft already and I still don't have my wings. I wonder if they'll flunk me out of pilot training, even tho' my dad is a four-star admiral."
McCain gets a free pass, because he's a republican. All he has to do is just show up. Just like george bush did in 2000. It's the democrats whose every word, attire and facial expression gets scrutinized by the media ad nauseum.
I don't fault you - it's an effect of the conditioning. After 16+ years of only positive MSM comments on the Clintons, and the outright gush of MSM love for Senator Obama ... sure, when something negative is finally said about either, sure - I can see how you'd interpret that as scrutiny.
Oh, I guess you missed the impeachment coverage?
Seriously, impeachment is for high crimes and misdeameanors. Not cheating on your wife and lying about it under oath. Clinton should NEVER have been put under oath to answer questions about a consensual affair with an adult. Now if the rape allegations had ANY merit, that would be a different story.
I guess you also missed the fawning over Bush when he ran, and at least the first 4 years of his terms.
Yes, of course the MSM covered the impeachment events - it was news and historic.
"Clinton should NEVER have been put under oath to answer questions about a consensual affair with an adult."
_If_ the event had taken place in the 2nd floor of the white house - the residence, well, then I agree with you. However, the event took place on the first floor, which is a public workspace. When you're in the oval office, you are there not as Bill Clinton, but as President Clinton. When you're in the office, you're on my time, and you are accountable for your actions. Consent is inconsequential.
Further, it is arguable that because this happened in the workplace, there is no such consent protection for a superior engaging with a subordinate. It has also been argued that "high crimes" is not meant to denote the severity of the crime, but the level of the official who committed the offense.
I play poker with an older gentleman who was a POW in Vietnam for over seven years. I admire his sacrifice, but he is not at all qualified to be president. McCain is a very similar type person - extremely conservative and out of touch with the rest of the country.
Well Duh John McCain doesnt have to take the test. He is waived to the front of the line because of his military background. Miltiary background thats the most important requirement for being commander in chief. Since we are a war mongering country we need someone who has fought wars because thats all you need to call yourself a Foreign Policy expert. You dont need to know the difference between Sunni, Shia, Al Queada Extremist.. Who cares they are all muslim thats all you need to know. You dont need to know that the commander in charge of Iraq ground forces is NOT the same as the one in charge of Afghanistan's ground forces.
We are a war mongering nation and when people say it. It offends our patriotic beliefs but look at us we are fighting two wars and saber rattling for a 3rd.
All you need for CIC is war mongering expereince
Carol
Posted April 15, 2008 | 12:54 PM (EST)