Robert Reich hears McCain’s ‘real’ plan for Iraq

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, who apparently has a blog, ran into John McCain on Sunday in ABC’s green room. As Reich explained it, they had an interesting chat. (via Atrios)

I asked him why he continued to call for more troops for Iraq when he must know it’s a political non-starter. He said he thought it important for the morale of the troops.

McCain gives every impression of meaning what he says, which is one of his greatest assets. But I simply can’t believe this one. What’s most important for the morale of the troops is knowing they’ll be coming home soon, not hearing some politician say we need more troops when there’s no possible chance of that happening.

I think McCain knows Iraq is out of our hands — it’s disintegrating into civil war, and by 2008 will be a bloodbath. He also knows American troops will be withdrawn. The most important political fact he knows is he has to keep a big distance between himself and Bush in order to avoid being tainted by this horrifying failure. Arguing that we need more troops effectively covers his ass. It will allow him to say, “if the President did what I urged him to do, none of this would have happened.”

I obviously wasn’t there, and as far as I can tell, McCain hasn’t commented on his chat with Reich. But if this account is accurate, is it possible that McCain is this callous?

On the notion of morale, why, exactly, would any American in uniform feel encouraged about an increase in troops in Iraq? For one thing, there aren’t any additional troops, which means more tours for those who’ve already been serving. I have a hunch that won’t help morale; it’ll hurt it. For another, even if McCain wants the troops to believe thousands more on their way, won’t it be worse for morale when they learn these people aren’t coming?

As for the political strategy, Reich argues that McCain’s plan for 20,000 additional troops is simply a 2008 calculation. In a way, this makes a lot of sense — it’s a way for McCain, who’s been to Bush’s right on the war for years, to create a discernable distance between his approach and that of the White House.

Except I suspect it won’t work — it’s too clever by half. McCain’s basic pitch will be too convoluted to be coherent. He’ll essentially tell voters, “I agreed that Saddam was a threat, I agreed that Iraq had WMD, I backed the invasion, I urged the administration to ‘stay the course,’ and I rarely said a word about the recklessness, incompetence, corruption, and mismanagement. But nearly four years into the conflict, I wanted to send more troops, Bush didn’t, so none of this is my fault.”

No wonder McCain feels the need to read from a script; the guy is lost in the woods.

“…is it possible that McCain is this callous

Um… Yes.

  • Yep. He sure is. St. John is one of the most cynical opportunists ever to disgrace the American political scene. A total fraud, propped up by his 35-year old war rep and by numerous man-crushes from media types who are ashamed of their own gutless histories.

  • McCain is just another one of Cheney’s many enablers. The monster isn’t dead yet, and wants more. We need to make sure McCain’s favorite “go long” option in Iraq doesn’t segue right into “go on” to Iran …

    Tank of gas: too much. Prescription refill: too much. Iraq war: WAY too much. Dick Cheney on bending the rules: priceless.

    According to Sy Hersh in the New Yorker, Cheney and his neocon colleagues still hope to hit Iran with a military strike despite a Democratic Congress, and may have the means to pull it off. What do we have to do to keep him from pursuing a military option in Iran? Drive a wooden stake through his heart?

  • Oops. Wrong thread for #5. I’m as confused as John McCain.

    Since chickenhawks are hypocrites for being warlike, how about veterans like McCain. Do they have validity for being warlike?

  • If you think troop morale is low now, wait until we are down to the reduced force of advisers who are stuck with the impossible task of making an Iraqi army viable. Expect to see mass exits of officers and NCOs during the next two years. Rumsfeld’s transformation is nearly completed. In the meantime, the boys die while the old fog hats can’t decide to fart or shit or get off the pot.

  • Yes, the price of McCain becoming President and solving all our problems HIS WAY is another 1,400 dead American Servicemen.

    Is that too high a price to pay? Not for John McCain. Think of all the Americans who died while his dad bombed Hanoi to get the North Vietnamese to come to the peace table on our “honorable” terms.

    McCain can’t run to the left of Bush. There is no room right now. He has to go to the right and there is no viable lane there but more troops (he could call for a declaration of war against the Maliki Government for being such militia whipped pussies, but I doubt that is going to happen). But he is as delusional as Newt if he thinks this will work.

  • On the notion of morale, why, exactly, would any American in uniform feel encouraged about an increase in troops in Iraq?

    “Great, we’ll have to share what little shot up, clapped out crap we have with more people!”

    McCain is just drawing from the ShrubCo playbook: Lie to the troops because you think they’re too stupid to figure it out. Lie to the public for the same reason. I’m sure if any one calls him on his bullshit he’ll say that person hates the soldiers.

    Do you think the Vietnamese would take him back if we wrapped him a pretty bow around his neck?

  • Even Cokie Roberts thought McCain’s position is has some cynical aspects. (I can’t recall whether she used the C word in her Monday morning pronouncement on NPR.)

    Bud

  • Why aren’t their quotes around McCain’s remarks cited by Reich in his blog? Seems a little suspicious… Perhaps he paraphrased a bit?

  • I’m beginning to seriously wonder if McCain is starting to lose his mind, bit by bit. Being a political opportunist (which he is) is one thing but he’s beginning to display symptoms of some pretty alarming mental tendencies.

    I don’t pretend to be a mental health professional, but I’ve watched McCain for years and some of this stuff he’s doing lately goes beyond mere political games, IMHO.

    Let’s keep a close eye on him, shall we?

  • I thought McCain was pretty sad speaking to the GOP convention in 2004, but I really didn’t dismiss him as a political tool with no honor left in him until this year, when he climbed on the bandwagon to disparage Kerry’s clown-footed “joke” that backfired. McCain knew good and well what his friend and fellow veteran meant, but he sang the Rove karaoke just the same.

    The most pathetic thing is that he’s so clearly (unless I’m just being generous) uninspired as he mouths these political scripts. He sits there with his flesh drooping and his complexion all ash-white, and the “maverick straight talker” says things he knows are not true, not responsible, not honorable.

    Is McCain really this callous? At this point, McCain will clearly be as anything as he’s got to be.

  • I loved Jonathan Alter’s comments last night on Olbermann about McCain and his position on abortion and, in deference to JRS Jr., I AM paraphrasing:

    In 2000 it was called the Straight Talk Express. I guess we can’t call it the Gay Talk Express. Maybe the Crooked Talk Express….

  • Reich has a blindspot a mile wide.

    He is apparently unaware of the four major permanent airbases and the 60-acre Citadel, with its own water, power, sewage, and six foot thick outer perimeter, minefield, fixed gun turrets, and who knows what kinds of microwave weapons and other new toys.

    McCain is not that stupid. He KNOWS that the U.S. military will not leave those bases, now, in two years, or in 50 years. It’s clear that they are permanent, absent warcrimes trials and convictions for the crimes that put those bases there.

    Pretending that the troops are coming home is nice. Ignoring that the airbases will not be dismantled is almost a mental illness.

    Reich is being stupid and naive; McCain is being bloodthirsty as usual.

  • To this day, I find myself amazed at the number of Vietnam combat veterans who sincerely believe that they won every fight they were in, and that had we put in more troops and “stayed the course” we’d have won. I put it off to the fact most guys in the infantry (at least in Vietnam, and actually pretty much throughout American military history, unlike other countries) are not the brightest bulbs in the box, coupled with the desire not to admit that the seminal event of your life had you doing The Wrong Thing, but I find most of these people are actually from the “intelligent” part of the military (aviation and such), so it’s mostly the desire not to admit you were wrong in one of the most important decisions you made in your life. I’m sure this is how McCain thinks, and I am sure there are a significant number of potential 2008 primary voters out there whose experience will lead them to agree with him when he campaigns on “we coulda won if we’d a done it my way.”

    I don’t know if you can be a cynic when you’re a True Believer on something. You can certainly be Monstrously Wrong. Which McCain and all those vets are on this topic.

  • What’s most important for the morale of the troops is knowing they’ll be coming home soon — Reich, via CB

    Um… I disagree. I think what’s most important for the morale of the troops is:
    a) knowing (trusting) that they’re doing the right thing by being there
    and,
    b) knowing (trusting) that the people at home who’re making life-and-death decisions about them know what the eff they’re doing, and not just learning chess.

    So far, there’s been nothing to support b and, those who have had enough time to follow the news, know that a is an empty sack also.

    Crunching numbers – especially to the plus side — isn’t going to change *a thing* as far as the morale of the troops is concerned. They’ve been *had* and most of them know it.

    “McCain is just drawing from the ShrubCo playbook: Lie to the troops because you think they’re too stupid to figure it out” — TAIO, @9

    If that’s what they really think, it does make one wonder why they got in such a flap when Kerry — through omitting one word from his planned joke — actually said so… Logic, anyone? Consistency, per chance?

  • dammit, I thought this idea was all mine…http://www.tnr.com/blog/show_comments.mhtml?b=theplank&pid=58787

    the guy’s on the wrong side of Iraq as he’s been on many foreign policy issues over the last few decades (alarmist sniping at Clinton on Bosnia comes to mind). Although it’s possible it’s all a clever ruse (he advocates a policy that is completely impossible for anyone to deliver, knowing it will never be done. That way when Iraq DOES go to hell in a handbasket upon our departure he can sit back and say ‘if you’d only listened to me’)

    I guess it’s becoming more obvious with every passing day there’s not a hint of substance behind McCain’s call…

  • Comments are closed.