McCain predicts Iraq war over by 2013

herekitty · #1 05-17-2008, 02:16 PM

um, lol, if it wasn't so sad.
this is supposed to be good news? and Clinton says McCain is offering "empty promises" on Iraq. Am I the only one who can do math here?

McCain predicts Iraq war over by 2013 - CNN.com

Quote:

* Story Highlights
* NEW: Sen. Clinton says McCain offering "empty promises on Iraq"
* Sen. McCain says Iraq war will be "won," most of U.S. troops will return home
* Osama bin Laden will be killed or captured by end of first term, McCain expects
* The U.S. will be well on its way to independence from foreign oil, McCain predicts

COLUMBUS, Ohio (CNN) -- Sen. John McCain envisions that by 2013, the Iraq war will be won, but the threat from the Taliban in Afghanistan won't be eliminated, even though Osama bin Laden will have been captured or killed.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee made both statements in a speech in which he envisions the state of affairs at the end of his first term if he is elected president.

"What I want to do today is take a little time to describe what I would hope to have achieved at the end of my first term as president. I cannot guarantee I will have achieved these things," McCain said in Columbus, Ohio.

McCain's speech was unusual -- and somewhat risky -- in that it laid out benchmarks on which he could be judged.

"It certainly was an ambitious speech," said Bill Schneider, a CNN senior political analyst, noting that many of the things McCain mentioned will be "very tough things for a president to accomplish."

"But perhaps the key point that he made was the tone and tenor of his presidency when he said near the end of his speech, 'If I'm elected president, the era of the permanent campaign will end. The era of problem solving will begin,' " Schneider said.

"What's interesting about that is that precisely echoes what Barack Obama is talking about in his campaign," Schneider said, referring to the Democratic presidential candidate.

The Arizona senator said he believes that the United States will have a smaller military presence in Iraq that will not play a direct combat role, and he predicts that al Qaeda in Iraq will be defeated. VideoWatch McCain say most troops will be home from Iraq by 2013 »

"By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and -women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom.

"The Iraq war has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension," McCain said.

The violence in Iraq will persist, the candidate believes, but it will be "spasmodic and much reduced." But civil war will be prevented, armed militias will be disbanded, security forces will become "professional and competent," and the government will be able to impose "its authority in every province of Iraq" and properly defend its borders.

Speaking with reporters after his address, McCain insisted that "we are winning and we will win" in Iraq but said he's not assigning a date for success.

"It could be next month; it could be next year. It could three years from now. It could be, but I'm confident that we will have victory in Iraq, but I'm certainly not putting a date on it. "

McCain said victory means "our troops come home with honor and we do maintain a security relationship ... if viewed necessary by both governments."

He said withdrawing troops would basically be setting "a date for surrender."

Responding to the speech, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton said in a statement that McCain had offered "the same Bush policies that have weakened our military, our national security, and our standing in the world. Our country cannot afford more empty promises on Iraq."

McCain said he also believes that the "threat from a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan will be greatly reduced but not eliminated" and that U.S. and NATO forces will remain in the country "to help finish the job, and continue operations against the remnants of al Qaeda."

If he is elected, he said, he would hope that Pakistan will work with the United States in deploying counter-insurgency tactics in the al Qaeda-laden tribal regions.

McCain envisions that Osama bin Laden and his chief lieutenants, would be captured or killed.

"There is no longer any place in the world al Qaeda can consider a safe haven," McCain said.

He also believes that in 2013, there still will not have been a "major terrorist attack in the United States since September 11, 2001."

Other milestones McCain hopes to see at the end of what would be his first term are:

* Witnessing Russia and China cooperating in "pressuring Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions, and North Korea to discontinue its own."

* Significantly increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps, which will be "better equipped and trained to defend us."

* The application of "stiff diplomatic and economic pressure" by the United States -- acting in concert with a newly formed League of Democracies -- to cause Sudan to agree to a multinational peacekeeping force, with NATO countries providing logistical and air support, to stop the genocide in Darfur.

* Several years of robust economic growth.

* Taxpayers filing under a flat tax.

* The world food crisis ending, low inflation and a "much-improved" quality of life "not only in our country but in some of the most impoverished countries around the world."

* More accessible health care for Americans and an easing of pressure on Medicare because of lower health care costs.

* A United States well on its way to "independence from foreign sources of oil."

* A Social Security system that is solvent, does not reduce benefits for those nearing retirement and includes individual retirement accounts

* The confirmation of "scores of judges" to the federal district and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

* A secure southern border for the United States after "tremendous improvements to border security infrastructure and increases in the border patrol, and vigorous prosecution of companies that employ illegal aliens."

McCain also made veiled criticism of President Bush when he said, "I will exercise my veto if I believe legislation passed by Congress is not in the nation's best interests, but I will not subvert the purpose of legislation I have signed by making statements that indicate I will enforce only the parts of it I like."

Bush has made a practice of issuing signing statements that outline portions of legislation he will not enforce or abide by because he felt that they infringed on his executive powers.

McCain pledged to work with members of either party to make the country safer and more prosperous.

"And I won't care who gets the credit," he said.

All AboutIraq War • John McCain • Afghanistan War

bort · #2 05-17-2008, 11:09 PM

I hate to sound more wearily cynical about US politics than usual, but doesn't this make McCain the only person involved in this election who is at least trying to be honest and open about Iraq?

orchestral · #3 05-18-2008, 03:57 PM

word.

i really think McCain is the only person thinking rationally about the war. While his political persuasions are not my own, I think his frankness about the war is refreshing, accurate, and honest.

It really irks me that democrats and the liberal media have decided that since they are against the war, the appropriate response to the war is to end it immediately. This is very irrational and cruel in the long run. I think they use the war as a talking point to rile up left-wingers, but that same demographic fails to realize is that there is no financial or military difference between "ending the war" and what will happen after the war has ended. Either way, there is SO MUCH sociopolitical rebuliding to be done, and the American influence is so far-reaching in that country (and in many aspects, unwantedly so) that it is impossible to retract all of it. Even if we end our combat offensive, American troops would still need to be there for YEARS on a domestic platform, providing security and infrastructure (getting power, water, and sewage working properly, which i feel is OUR obligation, as we bombed those all up -- we broke it, we have to fix it).

I think 2013 is a reasonable estimate for when the war (which i interpret to mean an offensive combat situation) will end. But McCain's 100 year theory (which has been totally over-exaggerated, and is really closer to 50 years) is also a resonable estimate for how long we will have some troops stationed in Iraq. We STILL HAVE troops in Vietnam and Korea, and we had troops in many other nations long long after those wars were over. And liberals fail to see that as a good thing, which really bothers me.

Regardless of how or why the war started, and regardless of how poorly planned or executed it was/is, it is now the duty and moral obligation of America to fix whatever it can. We fucked up the war, but we don't have to fuck up the civilian planning afterwards. Good can still come of this. We can establish good political systems, infrastructure, and utilities for Iraq, and shit.. don't we owe it to them, after all this death, bloodshed, hate, lies, and chaos?

Sophia_ · #4 05-18-2008, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orchestral

word.

i really think McCain is the only person thinking rationally about the war. While his political persuasions are not my own, I think his frankness about the war is refreshing, accurate, and honest.

It really irks me that democrats and the liberal media have decided that since they are against the war, the appropriate response to the war is to end it immediately. This is very irrational and cruel in the long run. I think they use the war as a talking point to rile up left-wingers, but that same demographic fails to realize is that there is no financial or military difference between "ending the war" and what will happen after the war has ended. Either way, there is SO MUCH sociopolitical rebuliding to be done, and the American influence is so far-reaching in that country (and in many aspects, unwantedly so) that it is impossible to retract all of it. Even if we end our combat offensive, American troops would still need to be there for YEARS on a domestic platform, providing security and infrastructure (getting power, water, and sewage working properly, which i feel is OUR obligation, as we bombed those all up -- we broke it, we have to fix it).

I think 2013 is a reasonable estimate for when the war (which i interpret to mean an offensive combat situation) will end. But McCain's 100 year theory (which has been totally over-exaggerated, and is really closer to 50 years) is also a resonable estimate for how long we will have some troops stationed in Iraq. We STILL HAVE troops in Vietnam and Korea, and we had troops in many other nations long long after those wars were over. And liberals fail to see that as a good thing, which really bothers me.

Regardless of how or why the war started, and regardless of how poorly planned or executed it was/is, it is now the duty and moral obligation of America to fix whatever it can. We fucked up the war, but we don't have to fuck up the civilian planning afterwards. Good can still come of this. We can establish good political systems, infrastructure, and utilities for Iraq, and shit.. don't we owe it to them, after all this death, bloodshed, hate, lies, and chaos?

Well stated.

Problem--reaction--solution -------->http://kittyradio.com/soapbox/news-p...-solution.html

Tell me this thinking does not fit the formula which perpetuates war and occupation?

livoline · #5 05-18-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by herekitty

um, lol, if it wasn't so sad.
this is supposed to be good news?

i am not saying it is good news. but as orchestral pointed out, i cannot see how the "war" is suppossed to end sooner?

(if the us leave the country now the situation for a major part of the population will be worse than it was BEFORE the war started. that is not what i call "freeing iraq". of course, there is the question of whether it will get better if us troops stay another 5, 10 or whatever years)

herekitty · #6 05-18-2008, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bort

I hate to sound more wearily cynical about US politics than usual, but doesn't this make McCain the only person involved in this election who is at least trying to be honest and open about Iraq?

probably. but I was still shocked by the fact that he seems to think this is good news and Hillary was acting like he had make really great promises, instead of what he did, which is actually just say the war probably going to be twice as long as it already has been.
And it's already been looong. This really did turn into a Vietnam of sorts. Although knock on wood, it hasn't been as deadly for either side. Yes, I realize body counts are a really horrible way to contrast wars but I can't help it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orchestral

It really irks me that democrats and the liberal media have decided that since they are against the war, the appropriate response to the war is to end it immediately. This is very irrational and cruel in the long run.

I'm not sure. I wish I had the answers, or someone did, but obviously we can't see into the future and I'm not sure which way will be worse. I'm not strongly convinced one way or the other so I can't really muster up the fire to argue convincingly for either. Not even to play devil's advocate. This could have something to do with the fact that I just haven't been watching as closely as I should have been.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orchestral

Even if we end our combat offensive, American troops would still need to be there for YEARS on a domestic platform, providing security and infrastructure (getting power, water, and sewage working properly, which i feel is OUR obligation, as we bombed those all up -- we broke it, we have to fix it).

I definitely agree with all of this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orchestral

Regardless of how or why the war started, and regardless of how poorly planned or executed it was/is, it is now the duty and moral obligation of America to fix whatever it can. We fucked up the war, but we don't have to fuck up the civilian planning afterwards. Good can still come of this. We can establish good political systems, infrastructure, and utilities for Iraq, and shit.. don't we owe it to them, after all this death, bloodshed, hate, lies, and chaos?

we most definitely do owe it to them and I agree with this also. The only thing I haven't made up my mind on is whether it will cause more damage (in every sense of the word- political, human, etc) in the long run to continue combat operations or cease them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by livoline

(if the us leave the country now the situation for a major part of the population will be worse than it was BEFORE the war started. that is not what i call "freeing iraq". of course, there is the question of whether it will get better if us troops stay another 5, 10 or whatever years)

ay, that is the question, and it's a difficult one and the stakes are huge.
Ultimately I think it should be left up to the Iraqi people. I remember a while ago hearing something about a vote (by them) on whether we should stay or go. Does anyone remember if that happened? My memory is shitty atm.

orchestral · #7 05-19-2008, 12:25 AM

FUCK KITTYRADIO.
i just wrote out a very detailed, link filled, educational response and this god damned site logged me out, again.

but now i realize there are maybe 4 users, tops, who'd have read that post and bothered to watch any of the documentaries or order any of the books i linked to. so i give up.

AdamsGrungeGurl · #8 05-19-2008, 12:31 AM

all i am saying is i think this so called "war" is a sham from the start i see no point in it at all what so ever but yeah it should "end" ASAP and let our people by free and sent back home to there families

bort · #9 05-19-2008, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamsGrungeGurl

all i am saying is i think this so called "war" is a sham from the start i see no point in it at all what so ever but yeah it should "end" ASAP and let our people by free and sent back home to there families

Ah, you favour the "cut and run" option. The nations that went in and invaded Iraq created the current situation, so how the fuck do you justify not sorting the damn shambles out? Hell, you advocate not even trying. Pathetic.

livoline · #10 05-19-2008, 05:28 AM

i got a rep from sophia for this one. it was grey. lol.

bort · #11 05-19-2008, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by livoline

i got a rep from sophia for this one. it was grey. lol.

They're always grey. But it's not deeply tragic, you know that.

OneBreath · #12 05-19-2008, 06:09 AM

i say cut and run because iraq will ALWAYS be in shambles, because of their secterian violence. that's the root of the problem, we're just amplifing it with our military presence.

bort · #13 05-19-2008, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneBreath

i say cut and run because iraq will ALWAYS be in shambles, because of their secterian violence. that's the root of the problem, we're just amplifing it with our military presence.

There seemed to be less under Saddam... and you can't get him back! One way or another, for better or for much, much worse, it was held together better before the invasion set things off.

Forum Stats:

Latest Threads: