Veterans Respond to McCain's "Obama Wants to Lose" Remark

While Barack Obama spends the week in Afghanistan and Iraq, speaking to throngs of cheering troops and diplomats, John McCain is accusing the likely Democratic nominee of wanting to "lose" the war in Iraq. Here's what he said today:

MCCAIN: It seems to me that Senator Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.

It looks to me like desperation brought on by Maliki's endorsement of Obama's plan is starting to settle in -- especially considering that not many Americans and even fewer Iraqis look at Iraq in terms of winning and losing anymore.

But the question, then, becomes this: If McCain thinks Obama wants to lose in Iraq, and thousands of troops support Obama's policies, does this mean that McCain thinks those troops want to lose in Iraq?

Let's take a look at some math we all learned in first-year algebra for a possible answer:

The Transitive Property: If a = b and b = c, then a = c.

Of course, I know this might be an "unsound application" of the mathematical property, but still. What's McCain really saying here? Personally, I fought with everything I had in Iraq and Afghanistan -- to win. And based on my experiences, I believe Barack Obama has proposed the most prudent policies on Iraq so far -- as evidenced by the support he's getting from the American people and the Iraqi government. So for John McCain to disparage Senator Obama by saying he wants to lose is to imply that I wanted to lose as well. And, frankly, that's insulting. I would expect more from a fellow combat veteran like John McCain.

Anyway, as an "unsound application" of algebra or not, I'm not the only Iraq and Afghanistan veteran who's feeling insulted by John McCain's remarks today. Here's how some of our members at VoteVets.org feel:

As a veteran of a fifteen-month combat tour in Iraq at the height of the surge, it is incredibly offensive to see John McCain make off color remarks about Senator Obama's view on Iraq, claiming he "wants to lose" there. By bolstering his political rhetoric, he forgets that many veterans of the war in Iraq would like to see a reallocation of forces to Afghanistan to combat genuine threats to our national security. Would John McCain be so cavalier to say that I want to lose in Iraq, a place where many of my friends left their lives and limbs?

Alex Horton
Austin, TX
Iraq veteran
Army
2006-07

Senator McCain's comments represent the radical anti-troop, anti-veteran rhetoric his campaign has become known for. I went to combat, and I saw first-hand the damage the failed policies of George W. Bush and John McCain have caused to our American troops. I wonder if this eye-witness knowledge means that I want to lose as well.

Richard Smith
Huntsville, AL
Afghanistan veteran
Army
2007-08

The message of "losing" being offered by Senator McCain is a lie. There is no compelling United States interest in Iraq that is worth the treasure and time that our nation has been asked to pay. The police action in Iraq has done nothing other than to show the world that America is weak and afraid--of admitting mistakes. In this case, over 4,000 men and women have died because of the cowardice and lack of integrity of our political leadership.

Senator McCain has to stop following this folly. He has to show strength and admit that the strength of America is in its willingness to champion reason over fear. There is no possible cost-benefit analysis that can justify the abandonment of the War on Terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to police a sovereign state that no longer desires our presence.

George Zubaty
Louisville, KY
Iraq and Afghanistan veteran
Army
2001-02 and 2003-04

To suggest that Senator Obama wants to "lose" in Iraq is outlandish, thought I can't help but notice that Senator McCain has no problem with the fact that we continue to lose ground every day in Afghanistan--the real War on Terror.

Brian McGough
Ashburn, VA
Iraq and Afghanistan veteran
Army
2001-02 and 2003

To say that Barack Obama wants to "lose" in Iraq is completely beyond acceptable standards of political discourse. For Senator McCain to impugn the loyalty and patriotism of a sitting United States Senator while he is overseas to gain some short-term political leverage is beneath the dignity of the office which he holds. This is an act of political desperation and moral cowardice. John McCain should be ashamed of himself and immediately apologize.

Terence O'Rourke
Portsmouth, NH
Iraq veteran
Army
2006-07

I am very disappointed to hear another combat veteran like Senator McCain say that Senator Obama wants to "lose" the war. When I served in Afghanistan and Iraq, our objective was to win the War on Terror and we always gave it 100 percent. His statement today is very insulting to me and all the others who continue fighting the war today.

Peter O'Brien
Boston, MA
Iraq and Afghanistan veteran
Army
2001-02 and 2003-04

I served proudly for 15 months in George Bush and John McCain's war of aggression. By saying that my preferred candidate for president, Barack Obama, is somehow treasonous by supporting the Iraqi people's desire for us to leave, Senator McCain is saying that I am as well. I guess the only other way to be a good American in McCain's eyes would be to stay in Iraq for 100 years so we can "win."

Rick Hegdahl
Bellevue, WA
OEF and OIF veteran
Navy
2002-03 and 2005-06

I don't know what Senator McCain is talking about. How is staying in Iraq for 100 years winning, while responsibly removing our military from a sovereign country--at their request--losing? Wasn't leaving the whole point?

Ernesto Estrada
San Francisco, CA
Iraq veteran
Marine Corps
2003

Leaving aside for a moment the fact that Senator McCain has yet to clearly define what victory in Iraq looks like for the United States, it is extremely discouraging to hear such divisive rhetoric coming out of what Senator McCain promised would be a campaign "on the issues." During my time as a soldier and now as a civilian, I have never doubted that anyone on either side of the political spectrum has wanted anything less than the complete success for our troops. It is so unfortunate to see Senator McCain adapt the old tactic of baselessly calling a political opponent's patriotism into question as a campaign tool.

Neil Riley
Ashburn, VA
Iraq and Afghanistan veteran
Army
2002-03 and 2004-05

Lose in Iraq? It seems to me that the more the U.S. and Iraq discuss withdrawal, the more the violence subsides. And that's not losing. To be honest, there's only one place we're truly at risk of "losing," and that's Afghanistan--a place to which John McCain refuses to devote proper attention.

Peter Granato
Washington, DC
Iraq veteran
Army
2003-04

To say that Senator Obama wants to lose in Iraq is, in fact, saying that the majority of this country wants to lose. To suggest that every person who has been critical of the Bush-McCain policy favors losing the war is beyond reprehensible and absurd.

David Brignac
Baton Rouge, LA
Afghanistan veteran
Army
2006-07

This type of insulting nonsense will not go unnoticed or unchallenged by the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who've fought in both John McCain's war in Iraq, and in the other war in Afghanistan. Either way, something tells me that John McCain would never say the same thing to any of our faces.

Also available at VetVoice.

Follow Brandon Friedman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BrandonF

Comments

[lavndrblue]

Does Bush want to lose the war? President Bush is announcing today his plan on withdrawing troops due to better Iraqi security and trained Iraqui forces. McCain better go after the president on this because it looks like he wants to lose the war just like Obama.

I can't wait to hear the spin on this one from the McSame camp.

[rgblue]

From the mouths of true Patriots.

[nobillary1]

"The political tactics of division and slander are not our values… They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country." - John McCain, Virginia Beach VA, 2/2000.

I found this quote by Sen McCain on the "Conservative College Movement" site and it was directed at then-Presidential Candidate Geo W Bush. (I don't know exactly what Bush said to evince this dress-down by McCain but it had something to do with Jerry Falwell and Al Sharpton.)

But it does strike me the Sen McCain has strayed VERY FAR from his former way of thinking. He should be ashamed of the muckraking he's decided to partake of! My, my, how his thinking has changed.

http://blog.case.edu/conservativemovement/2008/01/29/john_mccains_top_ten_temper_explosions

[nkclark]

Time and time again, John McCain has demonstrated that he is totally unfit to be commander in chief. Like Bush, he will use our service people as props for his own political aggrandizement, but when he is called to vote on an issues that are important to active duty military members and veterans, he has either voted against the troops and veterans or has been too cowardly to even show up and vote.

As for his time as a POW, we have to honor that. But it is irrelevant to his fitness to be President. Moreover past honors honestly deserved are easily corroded away by present dishonor, which characterizes his current campaign.

In short, the man is a fraud.

As a retired Naval officer from the Vietnam era and Operation Desert Storm, I am tired of all of this "commander in chief" rhetoric. We are electing a President, not a military dictator.

[knowhelpnow]

Well McCain's idea of winning is the same as Bush 2 and that is having control over their government and their oil. If it takes 100 years what is that to them they will have already reaped the profits from the taxpayers, given their war profiteering friends a huge amount paid by the taxpayer.
It was always about the oil, the oil will kill the earth but they don't care, money is the bottom line for these people not our future.

[MaeScott]

McSame is turning into one of those say anything, do anything politicians...say anything, do anything to get elected.

Pitiful...panderer from the word GO

Mac and Cheesin'

[Scooter2]

And Obama isn't? You must not be listing to any of Obamas speeches, because he certainly
tells everyone just what they want to hear. He stands for nothing but bad news for our great
country, but I know he puts up so much fog you Dems can't see through to the truth.

[teacheng]

Equivocation, eh? The last resort of someone who cannot defend McCain's actions. Sad.

[Spider53]

These members of our armed forces make us proud Americans because they speak truth to power--the very essence of democracy. Democracy resembles love in a way: democracy means something only if the citizens living in it--receving its benefits--exercise responsibility by inexorable attention (effort and committment)--a daily involvement in the process whereas love has meaning and purpose only when it is given away! The person freely giving love gets it all back and more: it's the selfless nature of love. Those people in a democracy protecting and defending their rights are the just recipients of its largesse.

A good philosopher could identify the logical fallacy in McCain's premise as Alex Horton illustrates (nice job Alex) although he needs a syllogism.

I love all the people serving in the uniform of our military but not the mercenaries mimicking coorporate CEO's with obscene salaries (rip off?).

Veteran USAF, 1951-1958

[rjcrane]

There is no such thing as winning or losing in Iraq. All that we can measure at any one point in time is what we have lost so far: Trillions of taxpayer dollars, tens of thousands of American lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives and counting. We have also lost the goodwill of our allies and have gone into serious debt to other countries to pay for this debacle. We have also sacrificed our economy at home and have been unable to undertake projects here needed to improve our lives and our economic well being. And whatever emerges from this debacle will be a stronger Iran with closer ties to Iraq.

Trying to categorize our oppressive occupation of Iraq as winnable should be viewed as an insult to every American voter. And if you aren't insulted by this type of rhetoric, something is definitely wrong with you. If McCain thinks he can win this war, just ask him who will surrender to us? The Iraqi army? The hundreds of different tribal based groups?

What should be clear to anyone is that McCain isn't a very smart man and hasn't bothered to educate himself on issues anymore than Bush did. He shouldn't be rewarded for his academic laziness.

RJ Crane, topplebush.com

[Scooter2]

What issues has Obama educated him self on? Apparently its not trying to keep America safe, or
to keep our economy from collapsing. Which he will do if he gets his wishes. Glad you love him
now, because if he gets in the WH, 4 yrs from now you will be wishing you voted for McCain.

[teacheng]

What site do you think you are posting on, scooter2? This isn't Limbaugh's gabfest. Your remarks are only hilarious fodder for us to laugh at, without scope or merit. Make a 'logical' argument and we'll be happy to poke holes in it. In the meantime, go read a few hundred books, and then come back.

[terragazelle60]

Obama has the country's best experts with him. Repubs have made fun of Obama's 300 person group of experts on foreign relations. It's an infrastructure that has been divided into 20 teams based on regions and issues. It's maybe unwieldy- "But an administration is unwieldy, too. We also know that it's messier when you don't get as much information as you can," said Denis McDonough, 38, Obama's top foreign policy aide. People such as Sam Nunn, Madeleine Albright and Warren Christopher are his advisers.
There is an excellent article about how Obama's foreign relation's group is set up and who they are. Obama also has a degree in foreign Relations from Columbia...as well as has served since his election to the Senate in 2004 on the Foreign Relations Committee and has had a running tutorial from aides steeped in the issues.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/18/america/policy.php

Obama is better then you know.

[dwcokla]

Talk about luck.. McCain, Bush, et al.. General P... they put the "Surge Strategy" together, fight like hell against the Congress and all the Numnut Democrats who want the U.S. to lose.. finally get the money approved.. send all the Surge Troops over, execute the plan, succeed in executing the plan and defeating Al Queda, and have finally found the tranquility We wanted...

And now ... OBAMA wonders onto the scene after all the sacrifices by our troops.. OBAMA never voted for the Money to fight the Surge.. OBAMA drops in .. sees the current tranquility... and declares that we should get out within 16 months.. which is about what should happen... and close to what WILL happen...

OBAMA is a genius... and all those guys who did the work are dopes.. Right??

The bottom line is ... under BHO's plan, the US would have left defeated 2 years ago..

[TekMaestro]

I think, sir, that this is one of the most utterly foolish comments that I have seen here. First, I thought you were being sarcastic - particularly with the "defeating Al Queda" and "found the tranquility we wanted" phrases. Then, however, to my disbelief and horror, I realized that you were being serious with this asinine post.

Please read something besides the cereal boxes at breakfast. Listen to something besides the ludicrous rants on Faux News. Ask a truly knowledgeable source about recent history in Iraq. Even if you are a McCain supporter and cannot stand the ground Obama walks on, have something intelligent to say and some way to back it up.

The biggest thing that I am puzzled by is this idea of defeat - what exactly does that mean to you in the context in which you have used it? How, exactly, have we "defeated" Al Queda? Next, how would the US have been "defeated" two years ago without the extra troops sent over in the personnel escalation (OK - surge) which occurred way less than two years ago?

Next, understand that there's a big difference in helping to quell violence and succeeding in the objectives of the surge, and if you look at these objectives (of which political reconciliation was key) you will see that none of them have been achieved. So no matter how much people keep spewing this political rhetoric to the contrary, the unadulterated truth is that THE SURGE DID NOT SUCCEED in

[TekMaestro]

This is Part II to my earlier comment

And if you think that there is any tranquility to be found in Iraq, then please point it out to me and show me where that is what "we" wanted.

If you put your enemy on your payroll, of course he will stop shooting at you. And a temporary cease-fire is just that - temporary. Muqtada al Sadr could reverse that 30 minutes from... right... NOW. That is why there is a decrease in violence in Iraq, and the surge helped - underscore helped - in this decrease.

However, in the overall picture of our occupation of Iraq, the effect of the surge on the outcome of the Iraq War has been relatively minimal.

I submit that we cannot "win" in Iraq, neither can we "lose" in Iraq. All we can do is keep killing people until we run out of something - money, patience, or people to kill. I think the smarter heads are running out of patience.

[live by the golden rule]

Under BHO's plan, the US never would have lost thousands of lives in Iraq in the first place. [If the Republicans didn't like Saddam Hussein, they shouldn't have supported and strengthened him all through the 1980s.]

[bigkay]

The "surge" has brought down violence BECAUSE Petraus bribed and armed the Sunni's.
Get to hell out of Iraq NOW before we spend another dollar or lose or maim another soldier.
The Iraqi people , no ties to Al Queda, have had their lives and country destroyed., four million people have fled the country. This is SUCCESS?

[rjcrane]

There is no such thing as winning or losing in Iraq. All that we can measure at any one point in time is what we have lost so far: Trillions of taxpayer dollars, tens of thousands of American lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives and counting. We have also lost the goodwill of our allies and have gone into serious debt to other countries to pay for this debacle. We have also sacrificed our economy at home and have been unable to undertake projects here needed to improve our lives and our economic well being. And whatever emerges from this debacle will be a stronger Iran with closer ties to Iraq.

The violence also went down because 4 million Iraqis were displaced and/or killed off by genocide and neighborhoods were blockaided in Baghdad.

Trying to categorize our oppressive occupation of Iraq as winnable should be viewed as an insult to every American voter. And if you aren't insulted by this type of rhetoric, something is definitely wrong with you. If McCain thinks he can win this war, just ask him who will surrender to us? The Iraqi army? The hundreds of different tribal based groups?

What should be clear to anyone is that McCain isn't a very smart man and hasn't bothered to educate himself on issues anymore than Bush did. He shouldn't be rewarded for his academic laziness.

RJ Crane, topplebush.com

[Penny123]

If you want to know the truth about the war in Iraq and what's going on there. Why don't you enlist into the military and get a birds-eye-view instead of making assumptions and repeating what polliticians like McCain, Bush and MSM are feeding you. General Petraus played his cards right and did not give any pertinent information to Congress about the war in Iraq, as he was told by President Bush. As a result, you see he got his promotion later on as promised. The Iraq war is all about OIL. If you think it's worth dying for. . . ENLIST
You and other's who think like you, need to start running around the block and getting physically fit. If John McCain wins this election (If he does it will be fraudulently done with the help of Bush and the GOP) you don't have to worry about enlisting into the military because if you're under 30 years of age, you will be drafted. I bet you you will have a different opinion then.

[tigs]

why is it mainly huff post that has these comments? other media hardly mentions them , is it because the other media are repub owned, young people use the internet,older people rely on newsprint, or channels like fox and abc, please educate people to visit huffpost , otherwise the repubs will lie and cheat their way to the white house, the rest of the world would be devastated if mc cain won, he just hasnt the testicular fortitude or the gumption to be commander-in chief,i cannot believe the majority of americans cant see this, come on vets, flood huffpost with your stories they are very valuable, dont let mc cain lie about what you believe.

[neesy08]

It is wonderful that you served in Iraq, but the Iraqi gov't wants us out. If that is the case, we need to leave. I respect the service to our country, but for us to stay in a country when they said we should leave means we are occupiers, not liberators. I think we should do whatever the people of Iraq want.

[RTOTrainer]

I don' t know if you are replying to me, I served in Afghanistan. I haven't had the opportunity to go to Iraq yet, though I hope to.

The Iraqi government does indeed want us out. No one disputes that and it is how it should be. The question is not about do we leave, nor even when, exactly, but how we leave.

If we leave on a timetable, without consideration of the actual conditions on the ground, we court disaster. Even more so if the details of that timetable are published. The Iraqis do not want that.

There is also a chasm between a withdrawl predicated on (illegal) Congressional mandate or an arbitrary withdrawl based on Presidential order that is only better as itt is in keeping with the Consitution, and an orderly withdrawl predicated on teh request of a soverign, prepared and capable Iraqi government. In fact, getting to that point has been the plan the entire time.

We will do what the people of Iraq want. We've never designed to do otherwise.

[Tulka2]

You have completed your mission. Good job. Just a little reality check...? Armies live by timetables.

You remind us why the military is in charge of tactics and never the mission. Civillians are in charge of the armed forces in this country per the Constitution of the United States.

[RTOTrainer]

I've been to Afghanistan twice. I agree with Senator McCain's assessment. In fact, giving up in Iraq is also the first step to losing in Afghanistan as well. In my opinion, those who want to withdraw are either politically invested, or lack the depth and breadth of understanding of the history, strategy, and psychology involved.

Robert White
Rowlett, TX
Afghanistan Veteran
2003-04
2006-07

[oldcitizen]

"Giving up" WHAT in Iraq equals failure? No permanent American military bases on Iraqi soil because the supposedly sovereign, democratic government and people of Iraq don't want them there? No U.S., British and/or other Western powers gaining control of Iraq's petroleum reserves? Perhaps "victory " to you means the annexation of new territories or states to the United States; or, maybe it means promoting endless conflicts so that parasitic war profiteers can continue to loot the public treasury? Whatever "victory in Iraq" actually means, I wish the Bush/Cheney administration and John McCain would clearly define what they mean. For sure, those of us who "lack the depth and breadth of understanding of the history, strategy, and psychology involved." then might not be as critical and perhaps even be more supportive of what seems to be the most arrogant, inept and corrupt federal government in the nation's history.

[RTOTrainer]

Perhaps you shouldn't assume that because I disagree with you that I'm a cartoon character. What victory is hasn't changed. It's leaving an Iraq that is self-governed and able to defend itself. If you haven't heard that, you've either not been listening or chose not to hear--there are 5 years of speeches that say the same thing over and over again.

[djnoll]

John McCain was a POW who stayed when offered the option of leaving in direct violation of the Geneva Convention that a POW should attempt if possible to escape his captors and return to his troops. Now is this a sign of a faithful soldier, or of a womanizing, hard drinking coward who found himself actually having to act like a soldier? I have seen this man's rise to power, as have many people in Arizona, and we all are glad when he is not there. He is an appalling man, who may have been a good manager when he got his training group assignment, but he was apparently better known for his partying and his womanizing than his command efforts. For him to call anyone's honor into question is the ultimate in hypocrisy. Senator Obama is a man who acts from his belief that our soldiers should not have been asked to pay this price for a war that was apparently more about greed and failed ambitions than national security. He has supported and will continue to support out troops which is more than McCain has ever done or will ever do. This McCain wants to play the Commander in Chief not because it is so powerful, but rather because he can, like Bush, snub his nose at those in the military who would not promote him to a level like his father's and grandfather's. He did not deserve it then and he does not deserve it now!

[Tulka2]

Well said! It really is amazing how parallel the early lives of John McCain and G.W. Bush are. They have the same sense of frat boy humor too. McCain is, if possible, meaner.

[FOXYLADY]

GOD BLESS OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN THE SERVICE.....THOSE SERVING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTA­N.........­.......TO GET THE REAL STORY, THEY ARE THE ONES TO LISTEN TO AND I AM SO GRATIFIED TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT MCCAINS FOOLISHNESS. IT SEEMS EACH AND EVERY DAY HE PROVES HE IS INCAPABLE OF BEING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMANDER OF CHIEF OF OUR ARMED FORCES.
AGAIN.........GOD BLESS EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE POSTING AND ALL THOSE WHO ARE STILL IN THE FIGHT..........AND ALL OF THE FAMILIES OF THE FALLEN LOVED ONES AND THE MAIMED AND WOUNDED IN OUR COUNTRY THAT ARE STILL NOT GETTING ALL THAT THEY NEED AND ARE ENTITLED TO IN CARE AND HELP

[RTOTrainer]

Then don't get the idea that this is some monolitic opinion within the Services.

[2008thankyou]

Either is yours. For years now, the extreme right has been portraying that only Republicans can be patriots and that the military is comprised solely those who follow the republican agenda.

However, this is far from the truth. Our military's demographics mirror that of society.

[saltysea]

Here, here, rbenjamin (or is it hear, hear). You are sooo right. My bad for not profusely thanking those vets that are getting their views out.

So, here is my profuse thanks! Let's keep it up. And did you see the looks on some of the soldiers' faces during Obama's visit? They looked just as happy to see him as some of us would be, and that's happy!