On Iraq, McCain and Obama Have Impossible Dreams

[goldcanyonaz]

Victory and withdrawal, the two ends of the Iraq spectrum, are now likely to be the choices presented to the American public in November by Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama. McCain constantly speaks of "victory" in Iraq and defeat of the terrorists, pledging -- key the applause -- that America will never surrender. Obama favors a timely and complete withdrawal from Iraq, a position that has come to symbolize the absolute over Hillary Clinton's middle ground position of transitioning and narrowing the mission.

If either victory or withdrawal is elected, I imagine that the public will expect its new president to implement his or her campaign pledge. Yet both, at least according to shrewd observers of the United States military and senior officers in the U.S. military command, are impossibilities.

<snip>

Of course there's rhetoric involved what the candidates say, and maybe by next January McCain and Obama will move closer to Hillary Clinton in their recognition of what is possible given how much has already been thrown into the effort and the "trend lines" that the military is creating. Come 2009 though, boy won't the American public be shocked to find out despite what their candidates pledged, the powers that be in the national security establishment have other ideas of what will be.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/02/on_iraq_mccain_and_obama_have_1.html?nav=rss_blog

[cali]

1. I disagree. It is past time to get out of Iraq

and Obama has a responsible plan to withdraw our troops over a 16 month period. In addition, he is committed to NOT building permanent U.S. bases there- something that is vital if we are to repair our relationship with the Islamic world- and beyond.

[sam sarrha]

2. you will be surprised to find out how much stuff they leave there, because it is contaminated with

Depleted Uranium, we have dumped 1000 tons od highly toxic heavy metal poison that will still be killing and causing Extreme birth defects 16% now that we know of, and causing cancer when our sun burns out and becomes a Red Dwarf, expanding beyond the orbit of Jupiter, Findlay putting an end to the suffering we have inflicted on Iraq

[nightrider767]

3. We've already one in Iraq,

let's leave.

[Windy]

4. Are you admitting the Hillary has no real plans for withdraw? That she is going to leave troops in?

Is that what you really want to promote?

Despite a decrease in violence the Iraqis have failed to work on their government to bring a resolution to the conflict. I suppose you think that we should stay in their indefinitely to hold the various factions at bay?

If we give them no incentive, they will continue to do nothing. The evidence supports this conclusion. How many more deaths of americans is it going to take before we make the Iraqi government to step up?

We have to have timetables for withdraw to force the issue.

[IsItJustMe]

5. Seems like the same kind of logic that Repugs keep on using to stay over in Iraq. They say we have

to honor our soldiers who have died in Iraq by sending more of them over to die. I call this insanity.

It was a horrible idea to go into Iraq and it is an object failure. What your post is insinuating reminds me of a gambler who has placed a large sum of money in a slot machine, since he put so much money into it, he believes that if he just puts a little more into it, it will pay off. Of coarse it never does.

The moral of the story is, you don't spend good money after bad.