Progressive World Review

In 2004 John McCain was asked about the possibility of withdrawing from Iraq if requested by Iraqis, even if we weren’t happy with the conditions at the time, (h/t Think Progress) (emphasis original)

QUESTION: Let me give you a hypothetical, senator. What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there? I understand it’s a hypothetical, but it’s at least possible.

McCAIN: Well, if that scenario evolves, then 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. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don’t see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.

However, since Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki’s unequivocal statement endorsing an Obama style timetable for withdrawal, conservatives are coming out of the woodwork claiming that’s not what he really meant, or that Americans aren’t concerned with what Iraqi leaders want, anything they can come up with rather than come out and tell the truth that it was never about the Iraqi people, or the American people either for that matter.

The latest comes from McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot in a Washington Post column, Behind Maliki’s Games.  The entire article is one shameless straw man argument after another.  Boot starts off with an attack on Democrats, hardly surprising,

There is some irony in the fact that Democrats, after years of deriding Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as a hopeless bungler and conniving Shiite sectarian, are now treating as sacrosanct his suggestion that Iraq will be ready to assume responsibility for its own security by 2010. Naturally this is because his position seems to support that of Barack Obama.

There’s no irony because the charge is completely false.  Nobody is saying Iraq is ready for anything, the damage done to that country will take years to fix and not likely by al-Maliki’s government.  The point is this, Bush and his supporters, including McCain, have repeatedly said that if we’re asked to leave then we’ll leave.  But now that we actually have been asked to leave, we show no signs at all of submitting to their request.  This has nothing to do with any sudden change of heart for al-Maliki or the future of Iraq, this has to do with holding the Iraq war cheerleaders to their word and finding their word lacking.

The article continues with accusations of al-Maliki playing politics and his lack of military experience.  Boot also takes al-Maliki to task for not properly appreciating the dubious value of the surge.  Considering that Boot’s advisee, McCain, mistakenly credits the surge with starting the “awakening,” where the Sunnis broke with al-Qaeda in Iraq and turned against them, it’s more than likely that al-Maliki’s assessment of what caused the reduction of violence in Iraq is more accurate than Boot’s.

Even now, when the success of the surge is undeniable, Maliki won’t give U.S. troops their due. In the famous interview with Der Spiegel last weekend, he was asked why Iraq has become more peaceful. He mentioned “many factors,” including “the political rapprochement we have managed to achieve,” “the progress being made by our security forces,” “the deep sense of abhorrence with which the population has reacted to the atrocities of al-Qaida and the militias,” and “the economic recovery.” No mention of the surge.

But it really comes down to the last paragraph,

Of course, if the Iraqi government tells us to leave, we will have to leave. But, the prime minister’s ambiguous comments notwithstanding, the Iraqi government is saying no such thing, because most Iraqis realize that the gains of the surge are fragile and could be undone by a too-rapid departure of U.S. forces.

Only in Boot’s fevered imagination was al-Maliki’s statement ambiguous.  It comes down to this, Iraq’s troubles are the direct result of the American occupation and they won’t end until we leave.

–Paul Wilden

Digg buttons brought to you by diggZ-ET (WordPress Plugin)

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.