GOP’s Graham gives Iraq a hollow threat

October 2, 2007

For reasons that I’ve never entirely understood, the media establishment decided a few years ago that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is a “serious” lawmaker whose opinions on Iraq necessarily have merit. It’s not clear why — Graham has been wrong about Iraq policy every step of the way for five years.

A few weeks ago, Graham said we need not worry about Iraq failing the vast majority of the agreed upon benchmarks for progress, because a major step forward was near. “In a matter of weeks, we’re going to have a major breakthrough in Baghdad on items of political reconciliation — the benchmarks — because the Iraqi people are putting pressure on their politicians,” Graham said. A few weeks later, the South Carolina Republican told a conservative think tank that U.S. troops are “kicking their ass” in Iraq. Kicking whose ass? Graham didn’t say.

This week, the confused senator went in an entirely new direction, talking about giving Iraq a half-Friedman.

Graham told Time Wednesday that the Iraqi leaders have 90 days to start resolving their political differences with real legislative agreements or face a change in strategy by the U.S. “If they can’t do it in 90 days,” he said, “it means the major players don’t want to.” […]

Graham, who is up for re-election in 2008, said he will not wait forever. “If they can’t pull it together in the next 90 days,” he said, “I don’t think they are ever gonna do it.” He followed that prediction with a promise: “If they don’t deliver in 90 days, I will openly say the chances for political reconciliation are remote.” […]

“If they can’t do it by the end of the year,” he said, “how do you justify a continued presence?”

How utterly bizarre. As Faiz noted, “In February, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) warned against setting any kind of deadline for Iraq. Appearing on Fox News Sunday, he said, ‘I cannot guarantee you success, but I can promise you this: The day you set timelines and deadlines, it’s lost in Iraq.'”

So, what on earth is Graham talking about now?

I suspect that even he doesn’t know.

Graham’s bark doesn’t seem to have any bite, however. His stern words of warning to the Iraqi government are not accompanied by any repercussions. Time reports Graham “would not elaborate on what kind of plan he would push if the Iraqis fail to meet the deadline.”

Graham’s comments to Time are actually helpful in demonstrating the inanity that dominates so much of the Republicans’ rhetoric about Iraq. Congressional Dems were making the same comments in 2004 and 2005, asking how anyone could possibly justify a continued presence. At the time Graham, like his GOP brethren, condemned Dems for supporting “failure,” “retreat,” “surrender,” and a “cut and run” policy.

Now, Graham is using the Dems’ rhetoric for himself, suggesting there are two principal differences between war critics and war supporters. One, supporters are just a whole lot slower. Two, war critics aren’t willing to back up their talk with action. Indeed, as far as Graham is concerned, what happens when there’s no political progress in Iraq come the end of December? Will he start voting with Dems to change course? Will he support withdrawal timelines? A funding cutoffs?

Of course not.

Let’s not forget this exchange between Graham and Tim Russert on Meet the Press in January.

Graham: We should try to win this war. And the day you say we’re going to withdraw — three months, six months, a year from now — the effect will be that the militants will be emboldened, the moderates will be frozen, and we will have sent the message to the wrong people. Who started this…

Russert: So we’re stuck there forever.

Graham: Well, you stay there with a purpose to win.

In other words, we very well may be stuck there forever, at least as far as Graham is concerned. And if we give Iraq three months to make substantial progress, as Graham suggested to Time that we do, Iraq will deteriorate.

Here’s a wacky idea: maybe the Lindsey Graham of January can chat with the Lindsey Graham of September, who can in turn chat with the Lindsey Graham of October. Once they all figure out what they think about an Iraq policy, he should get back to us.

For reasons that I’ve never entirely understood, the media establishment decided a few years ago that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is a “serious” lawmaker

The “reason” Steve, is the historic gravitas attached to his judicious and serious minded management of President Clinton’s impeachment in 1998. It’s the same reason he’s a senator in the first place.

  • Senator Lindsay Graham represents everything that is wrong for America. He is a front man for the top 2% of our economy, he hates small d democracy, and he loves war that feeds the military-industrial complex. But now, due to that pesky little thing called the election cycle he finds himself trying to sell prospective voters the idea that ever since Bush was for Iraq, I’ve been against it. Watch as his sleight of hand campaign evolves into a “we need to leave Iraq” cry by next summer. What hogwash, what grief, what shear disdain this man and his ilk truly have for life, liberty and property. Lindsay Graham is no friend to us common Americans. Vote the rascal out! -Kevo

  • Graham must be getting some poll numbers that are scaring everything but that grating accent out of him, and so the talk begins. Talk he can use in his re-election campaign (“See? I want to bring the troops home, too”), talk he thinks gets him out ahead of everything he’s said before.

    It’s the only thing that makes sense, because there are reports today that the death toll for September was the lowest since July of 2006, and the “old” Lindsey Graham would have been holding up the newspaper and bragging about how this was proof the surge was working and we just needed to hang in for the coming victory.

    How many days has the Iraqi government had up to this point? What’s so special about 90 days? Hell, the Iraqi government could show today that it is serious about achieving the goals set, but we all know that they won’t do that today or tomorrow or the day after that.

    When is someone going to say what we all want to say, which is that we’re through bringing home caskets and we’re through sending home troops whose bodies and minds are broken, we’re through spending billions of dollars to provide cover for continued ethnic cleansing. It’s over. Saddam is gone, here’s your country, and a few hundred billion to put it back together.

  • Lindsey looks senatorial. It’s that simple.

    Credibility in this country is predicated on looks.

  • When is someone going to say what we all want to say, which is that we’re through bringing home caskets and we’re through sending home troops whose bodies and minds are broken, we’re through spending billions of dollars to provide cover for continued ethnic cleansing. It’s over. Saddam is gone, here’s your country, and a few hundred billion to put it back together.

    Pelosi and Reid could say it today, if they wanted to.

    Maybe they would say it today if we wanted them to, hard enough. Hard enough to keep pressuring them.

    I guess it just means we aren’t through yet. Not enough of us.

  • Increased media coverage of military funerals and regularly televised visits to military hospitals would give all Americans the needed visual of what’s happening to our men and women in “no-end-in-sight” war in Iraq.

  • U.S. troops are “kicking their ass” in Iraq. Kicking whose ass?

    Possibly their own for enlisting? Though it would be nice to think they were jumping up and down on Blackwater Gnats.

  • Trying to make himself relevant when he has always been wrong, not just wrong but pitifully wrong. Always condemning others for the same things he says 3 mos later. Always with a condescending attitude. He’s like a pouting little kid that loves to bully when in a position to and pouts when made to look foolish because he can’t support his position. He even denies his own record. He’s voted against the troops on every occasion but acts as though he’s the only one who ‘really’ supports the troops.
    Hope his constituents don’t lose their memory when ’08 rolls around and he attempts to get re-elected. Graham is a loudmouth who tries to make himself look good by condemning others at every opportunity. This war to him is equivalent to buying rugs at a pumped up phony marketplace…let’s see who we can convince this is all legitimate and I’m getting the best deal while I can.

  • If you can actually read, and read the real news, you discover that the “ass” the US military has been kicking in Iraq is its own.

  • As if the “Iraqi government” had much say about anything… They tried to kick Blackwater out, didn’t they? And?

  • After kicking Graham’s ass good-and-proper, our US Senator “Raw Lips” Chambliss (he just can’t kiss George Bush’s ass enough) would merit a glance.

    A GEORGIA native

    • Comments are closed.