McCain Has Zero Plan to Get Us Out of Mess President Bush Has Created

John McCain revealed today that he has no plan -- none -- to get us out of the mess the president has created. Senator McCain said that it is important for presidential candidates to "define their objectives and what they plan to achieve not with vague language but with clarity." But especially when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan, the picture he painted today of where he hopes to be by 2013 is totally divorced from reality and there is zero clarity about how he would get there. It's beyond being vague: John McCain is totally silent about how he would realize his rosy vision for 2013.

It's like saying by 2013, every American will be a millionaire and there will be peace on earth. Wishing will not make it so. The last things Americans need now are empty promises. They need, and our security demands, a concrete plan of action that brings the war in Iraq to an end without leaving chaos behind.

In his speech, Senator McCain says that by 2013, "the Iraq war has been won." How? What's the strategy?

He says "Iraq [will be] a functioning democracy." It certainly isn't now -- what's his place from getting us from here to there?

He says "civil war has been prevented, militias disbanded, the Iraqi security force is professional and competent." But not a word on his strategy to actually prevent civil war, disband the militia or train the security forces.

He says "the government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq." Right now, it can't even impose its authority through all of Baghdad and there is little trust within the government, of the government by the people and no capacity by the government to deliver basic security or services. So how do we get from here to there? Senator McCain is silent.

At the same time, Senator McCain says that in 2013: "the threat from a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan has been greatly reduced... U.S. and NATO forces remain there to help finish the job and continuing operations against the remnants of al Qaeda."

Exactly how will we have any chance of winning in Afghanistan and defeating al Qaeda if we keep 140,000 troops in Iraq for another three or four years? Senator McCain doesn't say because he can't.

The fact is, when I visited Afghanistan in February, General McNeil, who commands the international force, told me that with two extra combat brigades -- about 10,000 soldiers -- he could turn around the security situation in the south, where the Taliban is on the move. But he can't get them because of Iraq.

Even when we do pull troops out of Iraq, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, says he would want to send them home for a year to rest and retrain before sending them to Afghanistan. The longer we stay in Iraq, the more we put off the day when we fully join the fight against the real al Qaeda threat and finally defeat those who attacked America seven years ago.

Today's speech is further proof that when it comes to Iraq, there is no daylight between John McCain and George W. Bush. They are joined at the hip. When it comes to Iraq, there will be no change with a McCain administration and so there is a real and profound choice for Americans in November.

Comments

[ikkytito]

Thanks for the post Senator-Admire your attempts at reason. But-Why not give John McCain his 4 more years to prove -once and for all if victory is [possible? I keep hoping the game will end-the propaganda game that is. Another 4 years of Republican rule will surely destroy the party. Fact is the republicans need a Democrat in there next year. Got to get the democrats dirty on this one. This is so far a Republican war. If a Democrat is elected -He will have to get out quick. Damn politicians -

[Heartlight3]

Another 4 years of Republican rule will surely destroy the country.

[julianne]

Senator Biden,
The things that McCain and Bush said today sounded more like veiled threats than politics. Perhaps that sounds overanxious but we know now that in the past we haven't been anxious enough. It sounded as if soneone would attack my family in the future if I didn't do what they told me to do. Both of these guys appear to be mentally ill. Senator Biden, who are these people's handlers and who do those handlers serve?

[TheRationalLeft]

This is a completely meaningless post since American voters in the South are not a bit interested in winning the war or providing actual national security for the country. What they are interested in, is slogans that GOP happily provides while wearing their flag pins on their lapel, undershirts, underpants and perhaps even organs... at least metaphorically.

The race to the White House is between the Hypcritic Party and the PR machine.

Although Senator Biden expresses the correct sentiments he is preaching to the choir here and knows very well that his words, wisdom and knowledge won't resonate much beyond it.

www.rationalleft.com

[Boadicea]

Thank you for posting, Senator Biden. Your wisdom is welcome. Honestly, I can't imagine how any American could vote for four more years of endless war.

We need to hear from you regularly between now and November, Senator. I hope you will be front and center for the Democrats.

Thank you again.

[JTyroler]

"In his speech, Senator McCain says that by 2013, "the Iraq war has been won." How? What's the strategy?

He says "Iraq [will be] a functioning democracy." It certainly isn't now -- what's his place from getting us from here to there?"

McCain's strategy? He'll get mad and yell at them. Really. That's it. You were expecting something more than that?

[ikkytito]

It's nothing but a pipe dream. Democracy is foreign. The people are religious as all holy hell.

[eddiemoney13]

You sure brought your A game to work today, Senator! Everyone should see your interview with Chris Matthews.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/24655265#24655265

Keep fighting!

OBAMA/BIDEN '08

[YankeeCanuck]

Thanks for the link. That's the game Biden brings to work every day-- that's real experience and leadership. It's unfortunate that more Americans have not had the opportunity to get to know him. If they had, the present political landscape would look different.

[hoodrat]

I truly doubt it, but you're right Sen. Biden is the man - wish you could've stayed in the race longer. Rather hear you sir, than the shrilly one that wasn't before this race began. She changed her face so many times, hard to know who spoke. Damn shame too - always had more respect for her than hubby. You speak my language though.

[PioneerKing]

McCain said that is is important that presidential nominees "define their objectives and what they plan to achieve not with vague language but with clarity."
Regrettably, the addlepated Sen. McCain'd plans are worse than Bush/Cheney's.

[browndog2]

As a consrevative(not a republican) it's an honor to reply to your post. I respect your forthrightness and candor. I disagree with your plan to sub-divide Iraq, but at least you had a plan. The political machine screwed you, but then, the best candidate isn't exactly the most popular. Keep up the good fight.

[LizM]

Unfortunately, the media and blogosphere have not accurately reported what Senator Biden is advocating to end the civil war in Iraq without leaving a failed state behind - that is, when they report on it at all! And so, I am still not surprised that there is quite a bit of confusion out there as to what the plan is all about.

Senator Biden's plan is not to "sub-divide" Iraq. In fact, the Biden strategy is everyone's best hope for avoiding a division of Iraq and, worse, the complete and total fragmentation of that country.

[Krikkit]

There are other plans. I admire Mr. Biden enormously, always have. But on this score, the plan he laid out won't work. The Iraqi constitution already divides Iraq into Federations and it just isn't enough to stem a fight in a power vacuum. I've suggested an alternative plan, one which draws down troops at the same time that we increase, proportionately, our conflict mitigation personnel, trainers and diplomats. Much in the same way that we train others to take part in peace-keeping operations and help war torn countries get back on their feet and to set up their courts after the cessation of hostilities, we have the capability of training Iraqis of all sects and parties in how to negotiate their own peaceful settements. My plan has the added benefit that because we will be conducting a steady withdrawl of troops at the same time that we ramp up our diplomatic and training efforts, the perception that we are invaders and occupiers should fade rapidly. At the same time, since the drawdown will be steady but timed, our personnel will have security forces available during the transition period to ensure their personal safety.

[Krikkit]

Liz, please see my posts below in answer to your questions. We've taken the discussion to the "no reply option" level.

Also, let me state at the outset that we substantially agree. The flaw that I see is that our efforts at this stage, substantial though they may be, are not yet enough. I hope I have explained sufficiently below. If I have not, please feel free to ask further questions.

[Krikkit]

I have to add one more thing, Liz (sorry for the disjointedness of these replies. It has gotten very late, but I did not want to leave this 'til tomorrow).

You are absolutely right about the perception of "divide and conquer" that prevails in Iraq today. Furthermore, however, relying on the UN to implement the plan is simply removing the "Top Down" approach out of the country and further out of reach of frustrated Iraqis. Obviously, it is the local leader and his militias who hold the concrete power in Iraq today. For that reason and because the Iraqi government is so weak and ineffective, reconcilliation efforts must have a bottom up approach that empowers local and community leaders, not by fiat, but through their own guided efforts. Regional and major powers should absolutely use the lightest touch possible, if the Iraqis are to feel that the process is their own.

[Madampotential]

Great post. He wants to try to pretend there is no difference between the dems and GOP on the economy, healthcare, Iraq, and global warming. Obama is NOT going to let that happen. This is the perfect example of OLD politics. He is palying the same "compassionate conservative' word games Bush played. This is straight out of Rove's playbook.

McCain says one thing to get elected and then continues with Bush's policies... I sure hope Howard Dean puts up those John "100 year war" McCain ads in every battleground state ASAP! we need to get this GE campaign started now!!!

[We]

With the world's largest standing army of close to 2 million soldiers, why not ask the Chinese to contribute troops particularly to Afghanistan?

Even if it's just a couple of brigades - i.e. 10k soldiers.

They'd do it for Wal-Mart. Great P.R. especially in this year of the Beijing Olympics.

Watch for Republican noggins to explode.

[ChiMan1]

Joe, I think you missed it but the person and Administration that got into this mess was Bill Clinton who couldn't pull the trigger on anything but his zipper, and you were right there with him applauding. . . remember now? . . Oh Yeah! . oh! then a couple of planes flew into the World Trade Centers! . and don't forget the 17 UN resolutions against Saddam (as if they could do anything! ie Rawanda & Darfur) Oh Yeah! I remember that too, now that you mention it. . sorry been busy at the yacht club.

[sirclown]

Clinton was president on 9/11? Clinton was president the 8 months leading up to 9/11 when intelligence that an attack was on its way spiked and the government didn't seem terribly worried? Is that the new Republican attempt to confuse the electorate?

The UN Resolutions against Iraq at least made the situation no more dangerous for the United States which is a lot more than can be said for the policies of John McCain and George W Bush. On the other hand, the Clinton strategy with respect to Iraq apparently prevented Saddam from developing WMD.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Nice try. Come back later with your A game.

[tea in the harbor]

How about the violations of UN resoluyions by Israel? (That would be one a day, every day, since 1969!) And how about we go after the ones who flew those planes? Do you remember that Osama guy? We ain't touched him! Clinton did lay the ground work for the morgage crisis, his work with the republican majority gave corporate theives the green light and set up ENRON and many other anti American scams, but those planes flew in a month AFTER Bush was given a specific warning in his daily brief!

[plainsman]

Thanks for the post Senator Biden. Your insights are always spot on. It seems the republican strategy for the fall is, once again, one of rhetoric over substance. It's infuriating to think how many uninformed Americans will buy into the spin and misinformation.

p.s. I hope Obama offers and you accept the position of Sec. of State.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Huzza 2x.

[bluegreen]

if he would accept it, sec. of state would be great. i respect the heck of out him. he knows so much, and is practical and thoughtful and nobody's fool.

[LizM]

...continued...

If Senator Obama doesn't have a foreign policy heavyweight with him on the ticket who can say, for example, in the VP debates, that "the military option for Iran is OFF THE TABLE!" and talk about Iraq with the highest authority……and have the muscular credentials required to back those words up and resist being knocked down as "soft on national security", then we better start preparing ourselves for another four more years of more of the same.

I'm not saying that John McCain has a more sound judgement on foreign policy, particularly on Iraq, because he does not. But, I am not convinced that the kind of foreign policy/national security arguments he will undoubtedly be making won't sway 51% of the electorate. Barack Obama needs a running mate who can not only counter those arguments but obliterate them, so to speak.

Bottom line - I don’t think Obama wins the general without Biden on the ticket. But, I can damn sure guarantee y’all one thing…after having the opportunity to see Biden in action under the spotlight of the national media for a few months (the media WILL have to cover him if he’s on the ticket, RIGHT?), there will be many in this country scratching their heads and wondering why on earth they didn’t do everything in their power to make Senator Biden the next POTUS.

[YankeeCanuck]

Liz, for the sake of our country that is my fondest hope. David Brooks said in an interview a couple months ago "The Democrats are going to look back on all this (the nomination process) and wonder why they didn't just nominate Joe Biden. "

[plainsman]

Thanks for you comments, Liz. I'd welcome Biden as VP as well, but I disagree with your assertion that Obama doesn't win the election without him on the ticket. If anything, I think the opposite is true. Biden doesn't offer Obama a better chance to win a swing state. I don't think the outcome of Delaware is in doubt. My choice for VP is an unpopular one, Senator Bayh. Bayh has been a governor (executive experience) and a two term senator. While some will deride him because of his close Clinton ties, I think what he brings to the table as a moderate (to blunt the sure to come claims of a far-left Obama presidency and appeal to independents) and what he brings to the table as Clinton supporter (reconciliation) is appealing. He could also bring in votes in Indiana, a key swing state. I prefer Biden to be a strong diplomat as a Sec. of State.

[PioneerKing]

LizM, is that you Mrs. Biden? Oh, it must be what a good little wife you are!

[LizM]

Hey, plainsman!

The position of SOS would appear, on the surface, to be the ideal place for Joe Biden. But, I don’t think that does anything to get Barack Obama elected.

It is possible that so much has changed on the American political landscape since the last presidential election that all the Democrats need to do to be victorious in November is just show up. However, just in case we are back to politics as usual this fall and people insist on voting against interest - their own and that of their country - I would suggest that Senator Obama must make a very important decision as to who he will select and persuade to be his running mate.

Since Senator Obama does not have a strong footing in the realm of foreign policy and national security, his running mate should be a leader among Democrats on these critical issues with impeccable and unimpeachable foreign policy and national security credentials.

Now, of course, I don't believe Senator Biden should accept the position of Vice President in an Obama administration UNLESS he is given full reign over the Iraq file and carte blanche to implement his strategy to promote and facilitate a sustainable political settlement in Iraq, regardless of what the incoming SOS has to say about it!

Make no mistake - this presidential campaign is going to be about foreign policy and national security, first and foremost.

...continued...

[proudliberal4truth]

The year 2013? Seems to me that McCain is more like Bush than I thought. He wants to pass this war along to the NEXT president! What a bunch of pie-in-the-sky crap! I'm so sick of politicians pandering to the stupidest of the stupid to ensure their election. Barack Obama is intelligent and he speaks as if he expects Americans to understand thoughtful and insightful opinions. He truly represents a new way of leadership that this country has been sorely lacking....since JFK.

[FirstShirt]

Hey, math wizard, 2013 would be the end of his first term, would it not? If he is lucky enough to get reelected then that would be his term not the next president.

Barack is no Kennedy. He is an empty suit who has done nothing except posture for the media and smile for the camera.

The draft is over. Now he gets to meet the veterans who aren't concerned with "party image". should be interesting.

[kavan]

McCain's Straight BS Express!

[newshawk14]

Senator Biden, I thought your comment was spot on, my only area of disagreement is about the
being joined at the hip. I would instead use the phrase of our British cousins, namely,
"bumsucker".