McCain: Troops Out of Iraq by 2013 - Guts Anti-War Movement

By patriotroom Posted in War — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Senator John McCain declared on Thursday that most American troops will be home from Iraq by 2013 and that Iraq will be a functioning democracy with only “spasmodic’’ episodes of violence, a striking departure from his refusal so far to set a date for U.S. withdrawal.

In a speech in the heart of Ohio, a major battleground state in the fall election, Mr. McCain set forth a sweeping, extraordinarily positive vision of what the world will look like 2013, when he says he will have been in the White House for four years.

“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,’’ Mr. McCain said at the Columbus Convention Center. “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. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced.’’

Nice move Mac. In one fell swoop, he exposes the anti-war left for what they are: Pacifist appeasers who don't believe troops should be sent anywhere, anytime, for any reason. They will be left bleating on deaf ears about bringing troops home now.

Normal Americans support military action against America's enemies as long as the cause is just and the exit strategy is known. They are patient and they can live with a date, even if it is 5 years down the road. Before today, McCain was saddled with the perception of a perpetual war combined with the scurrilous 100-years-in-Iraq lie by the left. Unaddressed, that is a deal breaker for McCain at the ballot box. No longer.

The nice part is that he can assess as he goes and decide in 2013, if he wins a second term, whether that is the prudent course at that time.

In the meantime, he has just grabbed a pile of moderate, war-weary Democrats right out of the D column.

Bill Dupray at The Patriot Room

doubt it by tadams1138

He just accepted their premise that we have to leave at some point. They will of course move the goal posts and say that every death between now and then is his fault, etc, etc, etc. He didn't win anyone with that. If he wants to win "war-weary Democracts" who aren't actively anti-American, then he should propose a bold new squash the enemy type of leadership (not that Bush wasn't doing that) that people can follow. There is no leadership here, just an attempt at appeasing a voting block (and doing it incorrectly).

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Reply To This — User Info — #1

5 5 5 Negotiating with Democrats is also no win n/t by Joliphant

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Reply To This — User Info — #2

I told see how this is by South Park Conservative

I told see how this is appeasements is all. There is nothing wrong with saying that your goal is to have won in Iraq and have the troops not in combat missions anymore by 2013. It's better to have a goal to success than a date for withdrawal. Whatever can boost support for the war I'm in favor of.

Reply To This — User Info — #3

I assume you were replying to me by tadams1138

Because it accepts their premise that we need to be out. Why not say, we have a goal of no combat missions anywhere by 2013? Because it is an unrealstic objective. And while he doesn't go all the way to saying every last troop out, he gives into their demmand for pulling out by meeting them half way with all combat troops out. Do you really think, they'll meet him halfway? No they won't, they'll demmand the rest. And when combat resumes in 2013 and he sends troops back in, they'll say he lied like Bush 41's taxes. The way to handle this is to say "We will continue to stabalize Iraq based on the needs and desires of the Iraqi people, and we will continue to develop a relationship with them just as we have with Germany, Japan and South Korea. We have no intention of leaving, but instead have plans to take the fight elsewhere...." And follow up with some major motivational stuff on where we will hit them next. I have some suggestions: Iran, Syria, Lebanon if they ask for our help, the Philippines... That is how you motivate and lead. Compromise of this nature is weak and destined to backfire.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Reply To This — User Info — #4

I can't think of a better by South Park Conservative

I can't think of a better way to hurt McCain's chances at winning the election. The fact is that the War in Iraq is unpopular and I think stating realistic goals for 2013, more than four and a half years from now, is perfectly fine and could increase support for the war.

We have absolutely got to get the popularity of this war up or else we are going to lose it! Using he same kind of rhetoric we have been using for over 5 years and calling for wars in at least 3 other countries rather than reacting to circumstances as they occur (such as nuclear development in Iran) is only going to tank support for the war. More forceful rhetoric isn't going to do any good when Barack Obama becomes President and pulls all of our troops out of Iraq and has tea with Ahmadinejad.

Reply To This — User Info — #5

I guess we just disagree on premises by tadams1138

"War in Iraq is unpopular" ... "Using he same kind of rhetoric we have been using for over 5 years"

A major disconnect. I rarely hear a defense of the war from anyone but conservative commentators, and even then only some. So I haven't heard that much "rhetoric" like you claim. I've heard mostly unanswered criticism of a highly successful war, and that is why the American people are worn down. To me it is this exact absense of "rhetoric" that has made this "unpopular". I say add more of it (ie add verbal leadership like FDR did) and the popularity will go up. People like a Patton, not a Kissinger.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Reply To This — User Info — #6

Arg! I forgot the Reply to! n/t by tadams1138

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Reply To This — User Info — #7

It's actually a realistic goal by jonlester

and I would advise McCain to really insist on things he's sure of, since he relates so many times in the past when he stood up for the truth.

Militarily, the GWOT was always going to be a long period of mostly low-intensity combat. It's human nature to feel drained as it continues from year to year (even with low casualties and high battlefield survival, people get tired of knowing somebody's dying every other day) but there will be an end to this operation and a reasonably stable and functioning republic can be secured for Iraq by 2013. The Philippines occupation of 100 years ago, while different in many important ways (and may or may not have been just), was a similar military experience in that regard.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

Reply To This — User Info — #8

Redstate