|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
McCain’s Political Quagmire
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| McCain’s Political Quagmire
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Fdubya247 |
....assassination or election fraud the likes of which America has never seen, are McLame's only chances for POTUS....given the fascist times we live in, I'd say his odds are 1 in 4.
:hitler::ps:
McCain’s Political Quagmire
Posted on Feb 28, 2008
By Joe Conason
Within the next two weeks, the number of American troops killed in Iraq is likely to reach 4,000, assuming that the average number of fatal casualties per day remains steady. It is an arbitrary number, given meaning by the fact that the nation may briefly take notice, but a day will come in this presidential campaign when Sen. John McCain must explain what he thinks we have gained by the sacrifice of those men and women.
Anticipating that prospect must make McCain uneasy. Speaking to reporters on his campaign bus the other day, he worried aloud that unless he can persuade voters that current policy is succeeding in Iraq, “then I lose. I lose.”
Almost immediately he regretted his candor and asked for a quick rewrite. “If I may, I’d like to retract ‘I’ll lose.’ But I don’t think there’s any doubt that how they judge Iraq will have a direct relation to their judgment of me, my support of the surge,” he said. As the presumptive Republican nominee—representing the continuation of a presidency that has fallen from favor with as many as eight out of 10 Americans—McCain has ample reason to worry. His forthright support of President Bush, the war and the escalation of the past year is unlikely to endear him to independent voters who otherwise admire his maverick image and reform record. They still feel betrayed by the exaggerations and lies that led us into war. They don’t want to spend any more lives or money on this misadventure.
Against that overwhelming public sentiment, McCain insists that he can see “a clear path to success in Iraq,” with American and civilian casualties declining and Iraqis assuming responsibility for their own security. The Arizona senator evidently realizes that his recent prediction of a century-long American occupation did not go over well. “All of us want out of Iraq,” he told the Associated Press on Feb. 25. “The question is, how do we want out of Iraq.”
Yet, even while he uttered those soothing words, the Pentagon was preparing a new deployment schedule that proves the path to success is far from clear. The “surge” in U.S. combat forces has not led to stability, but to a terrible dilemma for American commanders in Iraq. The current level of combat troops is not sustainable, but reducing that level is likely to provoke increased violence. For the moment, the White House hopes to maintain enough force strength to forestall the inevitable reckoning until some time after Election Day.
Certainly the troop escalation helped to revive McCain’s fortunes in the Republican primary contest, quelling any dissent among his rivals (except for the indefatigable, unelectable Rep. Ron Paul). Yet the escalation appears to have had little political impact outside the GOP, despite all the promotional hype. If McCain is truly depending on the surge to elect him in November, he won’t find the data reassuring.
In national surveys, many Americans agree that sending more troops has improved conditions in Iraq. But those same surveys show that the temporary improvement has not changed their opinions about the war. A substantial majority believes that invading Iraq was a mistake, that we should bring the troops home within a year and that the Bush administration has handled the war badly, or very badly.
For months we have heard little discussion of the war, as the primaries diverted us with the ephemera of push polls, plagiarism and Fred Thompson. Sooner or later, the debate over the war will intensify again, offering its leading senatorial advocate an opportunity to tell us why the invasion was justified, given the absence of weapons of mass destruction; what he expects the continuing occupation to accomplish; when those objectives will be achieved; and why the installation of a Shia regime so closely linked with the mullahs in Iran is worth the sacrifices that we all mourn.
So far, McCain has preferred angry sound bites to substantive argument. He regularly accuses Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic leadership in Congress of wanting to “wave the white flag of surrender,” a demagogic cliché that ought to be beneath him.
But it is important to remember that on the subject of military conflict, the venerable veteran is not always rational. He has said we should have pursued “victory” in Vietnam, although we lost 10 times as many Americans there as we have to date in Iraq. Perhaps someone will eventually ask him a simple question: How many dead is too many in this war?
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item...tical_quagmire/ |
|
|
| cunning lingo |
| I think I hear Joey's cock calling? Run along and be a good "boy".... |
|
|
| Calistan |
Quote: Originally posted by cunning lingo
I think I hear Joey's cock calling? Run along and be a good "boy".... |
I guess Cunning can't refute what is written in the article...
SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
:lol:
....he's your typical mindless conservative cockroach.... |
|
|
| cunning lingo |
Quote: Originally posted by Calistan
I guess Cunning can't refute what is written in the article...
SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! |
What will your excuse be when Ole Mac is the next pres.? |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by cunning lingo
What will your excuse be when Ole Mac is the next pres.? |
....so I guess you can't refute a damn thing....good boy! Just like the dumb Duped Cunt you are.
:hw: |
|
|
| Calistan |
Quote: Originally posted by cunning lingo
What will your excuse be when Ole Mac is the next pres.? |
That Hell froze over? |
|
|
| Calistan |
:lol:
 |
|
|
| beshriver |
| i support the war...i support our troops...definitely not voting obama or clinton |
|
|
| Calistan |
Quote: Originally posted by beshriver
i support the war...i support out troops...definitely not voting obama or clinton |
|
|
|
| Jack Shit |
Quote: Originally posted by beshriver
i support the war...i support our troops...definitely not voting obama or clinton |
A grateful nation thanks you for your service. :rolleyes:
 |
|
|
| danrich03 |
| If Hillary steals the Dem nomination, I think McCain has even chances to win. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
I disagree with really nothing in the article except that it leaves many things out. Like what happens when the troops are removed and the middle east erupts and a gallon of gas is 5 or 6 dollars a gallon?
The writer seems to subscribe to this theory although he does not say it. Instead he brings up the fact that troop levels cannot be sustained and violence will return when troop levels must come down.
Perhaps this article should have been written for Hillary or Obama and their quagmire. When do they tell the American people that tough times are ahead when they pull the troops out? That they will not be able to drive as much. Heat their house as much. Eat as much. Have money anymore. When do those things come up? |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I disagree with really nothing in the article except that it leaves many things out. Like what happens when the troops are removed and the middle east erupts and a gallon of gas is 5 or 6 dollars a gallon? |
Nice cockroach "lojik" StupidStumpy....! :shit:
We invaded and occupied Iraq (eruption says what?) and the price of gas has doubled.
Fucking Idiot.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| mb33139 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I disagree with really nothing in the article except that it leaves many things out. Like what happens when the troops are removed and the middle east erupts and a gallon of gas is 5 or 6 dollars a gallon?
The writer seems to subscribe to this theory although he does not say it. Instead he brings up the fact that troop levels cannot be sustained and violence will return when troop levels must come down.
Perhaps this article should have been written for Hillary or Obama and their quagmire. When do they tell the American people that tough times are ahead when they pull the troops out? That they will not be able to drive as much. Heat their house as much. Eat as much. Have money anymore. When do those things come up? |
We are already in a quagmire. Gas is already tripled since Bush took office. People already cannot drive as much or heat their houses as much nor eat as much. You are projecting all the current problems on to the next president while living in a state of denial. If we continue on the current path, things will continue to get worse. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Look up the definition of insanity. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by danrich03
If Hillary steals the Dem nomination, I think McCain has even chances to win. |
I give Hill a 1 in 3 chance of getting the nomination, which using your calculation, would give McShame a 1 in 6 chance of winning over-all....
:ps: |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I disagree with really nothing in the article except that it leaves many things out. Like what happens when the troops are removed and the middle east erupts and a gallon of gas is 5 or 6 dollars a gallon?
The writer seems to subscribe to this theory although he does not say it. Instead he brings up the fact that troop levels cannot be sustained and violence will return when troop levels must come down.
Perhaps this article should have been written for Hillary or Obama and their quagmire. When do they tell the American people that tough times are ahead when they pull the troops out? That they will not be able to drive as much. Heat their house as much. Eat as much. Have money anymore. When do those things come up? |
no withdrawal from all muslim lands? |
|
|
|
|
|
