Would McCain honor Maliki’s request for a timetable or not?

Four years ago, talking to the Council on Foreign Relations, John McCain was asked what would happen if the Iraqi government, democratically elected and sovereign, asked for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. “Well, if that scenario evolves than I think it’s obvious that we would have to leave because — if it was an elected government of Iraq, and we’ve been asked to leave other places in the world,” McCain said at the time.

Four years later, with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and his national security advisor both publicly talking about a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, McCain and his campaign hedged yesterday on whether the senator still agreed with his own position.

Today, the McCain campaign “cleared up” exactly what McCain thinks.

“John McCain has always been clear that American forces operate in Iraq only with the consent of that country’s democratically elected government,” Michael Goldfarb, a McCain spokesman, told the Huffington Post. “The Senator speaks frequently with Iraq’s leaders and they have made clear that they share his belief that any timeline for withdrawal must be dictated by the facts on the ground. He met with the foreign minister and President separately within the last month…He met with Maliki on his last trip to Iraq sometime in late March.”

Goldfarb’s remarks represent a more pronounced effort to bring McCain’s position on Iraq in line with Maliki’s. McCain has forsworn deadlines for troop withdrawal — insisting that it be tied to conditions on the ground — and he did not, initially, express support the prime minister’s position.

Not even close, actually. I’m not sure if it counts as a flip-flop, but the line today from the McCain campaign bears no resemblance to the line from yesterday.

Consider this NYT report from last night:

During a stop at Primanti Brothers, a Pittsburgh sandwich shop famous for stuffing French fries into its sandwiches, Mr. McCain sounded a dismissive note when asked about the latest statements by the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.

Mr. McCain said it was the same as when Iraqi officials said recently that they doubted an agreement with the United States could be struck over the status of American forces. “Prime Minister Malki, is, has got his, he is a leader of a country,” Mr. McCain said, according to a pool report. “And I am confident that he will act, as the president and foreign minister have both told me in the last several days, that it will be directly related to the situation on the ground, just as they have always said. And since we are succeeding and then I am convinced, as I have said before, we can withdraw and withdraw with honor, not according to a set timetable. And I’m confident that is what Prime Minister Maliki is talking about since he has told me that for the many meetings we have had.”

Asked if he thought Mr. Maliki was aiming his statements at a domestic political audience, Mr. McCain said: “I don’t know. Ask him.” […]

Susan B. Rice, a senior foreign policy adviser to Senator Barack Obama, said in a statement: “It’s time for John McCain to explain why he refuses to ask Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their own future, and why he has completely changed his own stated position that he would leave Iraq when the Iraqis ask us to. The American people need a strategy for succeeding in Iraq, not just a strategy for staying, and John McCain’s stubborn refusal to adjust to events on the ground just shows that he has no plan to end this war.”

Now, it appears that McCain kinda sorta ended up in the right place. If Iraq’s democratically elected government asked us to leave, McCain agrees that we’d have to leave.

But given the timeline over the last day or so, it seems the McCain campaign had to think about it.

So obama is a sell-out shill that answers to the same corporate masters as bush and mccain. Who would have thought. He voted YES on telecom immunity, clinton voted NO!

Mary, Mark, and many others that were mercilessly flamed here were CORRECT! We need a president that will stand up for Americans, who overwhelmingly don’t support this administration and telecom spying.

Contact Hillary Clinton’s Campaign office and tell her to take this to the convention floor!

Hillary Clinton for President
703 469 2008
Press option 3

We don’t have much time left.

  • Who knew that Clinton lady was such a lefty? You’d think she voted against the Iraq War or something, the way johnny loves her.

    Oh, and there’s a rat loose somewhere around here, I can smell it.

  • This clarification is not really much of a change of position. As I read McCain’s first statement, he basically was saying that he didn’t believe Maliki meant what he was saying about a timeline. Goldfarb’s “clarification” essentially says that if Maliki were to convince McCain that he really, really meant what he said, then McCain would agree to withdraw, but Maliki doesn’t really mean it. I’ll bet he subscribed to the “No means Yes” approach when he was dating, as well.

  • “clinton voted NO!”

    Of course she only voted “no” capitaloze on the controversy over Obama’s vote. Had she locked up the nomination, rest assured, she wouldn’t have voted.

  • You can still support Obama and reject his FISA capitulation because he is still better than McCain.

    The majority of Americans (as shown in numerous polls) want a timetable for withdrawing troops regardless of the “situation on the ground”…they want a withdrawal from Iraq regardless of the “situation on the ground”.

    The oil corps have their oil contracts and troops will only be needed now to protect their profiteering. Maliki is under pressure to rid the country of these foreign occupiers. All Sunnis have been murdered, dislocated, or segregated and walled off so the “scourge” worked to get violence down enough that Iraqis can demand these foreign occupiers leave. But McCain wants a presence in the ME and will not even address the issue of permanent military bases other than to compare it to the situation of Korea…which means a permanent presence. McCain really wants to say “they just don’t know what’s good for them” but he’ll get around to it.

  • Um, this thread is on McCain & Al Maliki’s request for a withdrawl timetable. -BuzzMon

    I see some spillover.

    Clean up on aisle 1, please!

  • a Pittsburgh sandwich shop famous for stuffing French fries into its sandwiches

    That’s just wrong

  • I can see the scenario now…

    Sometime in Sept/Oct a deal is annouced about troop status. It will include a ‘loose’ time line for troop withdrawal (not 16 months but more like 3-5 years with caveats galore).

    McCain will endorse the ‘plan’ and the MSM will praise it up the wazzoo.

    The headlines will read:

    McCain Proven Right on Iraq
    Stay the Course Works
    etc etc

    Will also get a ton of stories about how if we’d followed Barak ‘Cut-and-Run’ Obama’s advice Iraq would be a mess.

    Just enough voters in key swing states will buy this idiocy (if Florida and Ohio taught us anything its that a few hundred votes MATTER and close counts) to swing the election to McCain in 2008.

    Of course the ‘caveats’ for withdrawal will never be met. And Bush will find some way to back out of the deal before the inugaration. Probably use Maliki’s close ties to Iran to declare the Iraq government ‘untrustworthy’ or something and over throw it. And we’re right back where we started.

  • a Pittsburgh sandwich shop famous for stuffing French fries into its sandwiches

    That’s just wrong…

    Its delicous.

    Granted, you’ll die of a heart attack at fifty. But you’ll die happy and well fed.

  • McCain and his campaign hedged yesterday on whether the senator still agreed with his own position.

    This is basically McCain’s central campaign theme, right? Whatever I said I was for when I was “Maverick” McCain…today I’m against it.

  • Seems to me that Maliki is suggesting something not a million miles away from what Obama has always advocated – a timeline to get out.

    Perhaps we should examine the underlying thinking behind Maliki’s statement, rather than how it plays to an American audience and impacts upon the election candidates.

    What Maliki’s basically saying is we want to take charge of the situation ourselves and – this is the bit that no American politicians are acknowledging – American forces there are now part of the problem. Maliki understands, even if McCain doesn’t, that US troops are a magnet for attacks, their presence weakens the credibility of the Iraqi government amongst its population and worst of all acts as a recruitment sergeant for insurgents.

    It appears that Mr Foreign Policy Is My Forte doesn’t have a grasp of current Iraqi politics. Maliki might also be mindful of the fact that McCain’s public utterances about a plethora of long-term US bases all over Iraq makes his country look less like a sovereign nation and more like one giant launch pad for attacks on other Middle Eastern countries.

    The more McCain talks about not quitting until victory is ‘achieved’ to his own satisfaction, the more he points out to the domestic Iraqi audience that America can do what it damn well pleases, for as long as it pleases. Which is not helpful to an Iraqi administration trying to exert authority, independence and show legitimacy.

  • Comments are closed.