McCain to Obama: You don’t have to re-invade Iraq to fight Al Qaeda, you know

posted at 2:46 pm on February 27, 2008 by Allahpundit

In which Maverick shores up his support among conservatives and presses his huge advantage over Obama on national security in one fell swoop. Here’s the Messiah’s answer on Iraq last night, which recycles a strategy recommended by Baker-Hamilton and endorsed by our friends at the Times last summer. Rather than clear AQI from areas and try to hold them, we’ll pull back to regional bases to get our guys out of harm’s way, cross our fingers that the jihadis don’t make a comeback, and play long distance whack-a-mole with them if they do. Pay attention to Obama’s emphasis on threats to the homeland: He’s leaving himself wiggle room to decide not to assist the Iraqis going forward unless they can show AQI is planning terror attacks on the American homeland, as opposed to just Baghdad or Mosul. That’s a curious line to take for the left, which is normally comfortable intervening militarily where no American security interests are at stake (Haiti, Kosovo, soon perhaps Darfur), but then this is the guy who thinks zero troops in Iraq plus lots of troops in Afghanistan is somehow the magic combination to defeating AQ.

Here’s the obligatory McCain riposte, to which the Messiah responded this morning by reminding him that AQI wouldn’t be in Iraq at all if Saddam Hussein was still around to scare them off. As soon as he gets that time machine built, expect this problem to be solved. McCain’s rejoinder to the rejoinder: “Where is the audacity of hope when it comes to backing the success of our troops all the way to victory in Iraq? What we heard last night was the timidity of despair.” Gonna be a fun campaign.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Not a bad job by McCain

Defector01 on February 27, 2008 at 2:50 PM

At least McCain gets this one right…how can Barack Hussein Obama be such a nincompoop?

jimbo2008 on February 27, 2008 at 2:50 PM

The world needs McCain to win, I just do not see it happening. Obama will ride the tide of Messiah, with free press and no negative stores by the MSM, all the way to Nov. and the White House.

I hope I am wrong. Dearly. But doubt that I am.

Voidseeker on February 27, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Oh my goodness. I love it.

Bill Cunningham, you’ve been pwned. You too Hillary.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 2:53 PM

I don’t understand… he could have just said “Barack Hussein Obama” over and over and over.

DaveS on February 27, 2008 at 2:54 PM

Heh. That ain’t pale meat he’s serving up there.

John McCain. Not just the other white meat? LOL

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 2:57 PM

When McCain shines, he shines!
On the subject of Obama’s military debacles, what’s up with General Casey saying there’s “no reason to doubt” Obama’s story about troops in Afghanistan? Did he READ the story? When did the Army start splitting up platoons in theatre?

q2600 on February 27, 2008 at 2:57 PM

This IS where McCain gets it right. I hope the trickle down theory works in his case.
I would like to ask this ? during the first JMc and BO debate:
How can we protect our country from terrorism when our borders are wide open?
Go to the link http://www.border.com, buy a copy of the movie and send it to Congress and demand that they watch it. Maybe then they will take their blinders off long enough to see the truth.

Christine on February 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM

“Not the audacity of hope but the timidity of despair.” I like that. Timidity of Despair. Has a nice ring to it.

I guess it’s too early to call BHO a spineless sob-sister and jihadist doormat. Save that for the fall.

Vote Sauron 08 on February 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM

Obama seems to think that al Qaeda only needs to be stopped on those fronts which he supports a US presence in. McCain nails him.

darii on February 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM

The Obama strategy is foolish on it’s face. If something like that could work in the real world, the LAPD would redeploy to Sacramento and do ‘surgical strikes’ against the gangs.

Asher on February 27, 2008 at 3:00 PM

Woah.

Second look at Johnny?

Ah. What does it matter at this point? Both of the party nominees are going to raise my taxes and end illegal immigration by not making it illegal. At least one of them will spend some of that money on the military.

lodestonejames on February 27, 2008 at 3:00 PM

The democrats plans vis a vis Iraq are so absurd in the face of the facts that I’m convinved they must not being speaking to their true motivations, which I consider craven and illogical.

We need to keep our “babies” safe = We want the world to love us again.

We need to focus on Afghanistan = We’ll only go where the world wants us to go.

etc. etc. etc.

Without the democrats I wouldn’t know what real dissembling looks like, for that at least, I am grateful.

Dr. Manhattan on February 27, 2008 at 3:00 PM

To funny…
not much McShamnesty can say about “driving the bus in the ditch” no matter how he spins it…
LOL

TOPV on February 27, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Asher LOL better standard of living and public schools in Sacramento, to be sure.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Obama knows he cannot POSSIBLY withdraw US troops from Iraq if he becomes CinC. He is intentionally LYING and PANDERING to a poll number that want us out of Iraq.

jimbo2008 on February 27, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Rather than clear AQI from areas and try to hold them, we’ll pull back to regional bases to get our guys out of harm’s way, cross our fingers that the jihadis don’t make a comeback, and play long distance whack-a-mole with them if they do.

There was an excellent article on the Petreaus strategy on counter insurgency and the absolute need to have troops on the ground and form relationships with the indigenous population. (It compared it to Frances strategy in Algeria I believe) Which is the exact opposite of what has worked in Iraq. Good job Obama, lets try what we know does not work.

Does anyone remember that article?

Theworldisnotenough on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Where is the audacity of hope when it comes to backing the success of our troops all the way to victory in Iraq?

Our troops, basically the same relative handful going over and over again while most Americans are out shopping, who were victorious in 3 weeks in 2003, have been in Iraq for 5 more years trying to get this ever redefined, elusive, sis, boom, bah “Victory!”.

Well, 95 years to go.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

“Where is the audacity of hope when it comes to backing the success of our troops all the way to victory in Iraq? What we heard last night was the timidity of despair.” Gonna be a fun campaign.

We may have a real political campaign coming up that involves real issues, for once.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:03 PM

Obama stumbles across the Left’s continued line in Afghanistan: More troops does not equal better in Afghanistan. The terrain and mission dictates that light infantry be the driving force in Afghanistan. Mechanized infantry does not work there. The strategy and tactics must be different between Iraq and Afg. So we use the right tool in Afg, and the right tool in Iraq. The right tool in Afg is a small number of troops supported by air power. The right tool in Iraq is large numbers of troops, vital to mass urban conflict. This idea that if we just pick up and relocate from Iraq to Afg is just silly. If we go to 50,000 troops in Afg, we’ll just waste a year training mechanized infantry soldiers and officers to fight like light fighters, then deal with the articles about how thousands of troops sit on their cans in Afg absorbing combat pay, because there’s not enough mission, passable terrain, or need for massive numbers in Afg. This continues to be a stumbling block for the Left, and shows plainly their total, willful ignorance to combat strategy and tactics.

Spc Steve on February 27, 2008 at 3:03 PM

“timidity of despair,”

That is a great, great line.

Theworldisnotenough on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Our troops, basically the same relative handful going over and over again while most Americans are out shopping, who were victorious in 3 weeks in 2003, have been in Iraq for 5 more years trying to get this ever redefined, elusive, sis, boom, bah “Victory!”.

Well, 95 years to go.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Ah, we hear the voice of despair again.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

lodestonejames on February 27, 2008 at 3:00 PM

Ah. What does it matter at this point? Both of the party nominees are going to raise my taxes and end illegal immigration by not making it illegal. At least one of them will spend some of that money on the military.

So what you’re saying is that you “don’t see much difference in Barack Obama than Hillary Clinton–or, for that matter, John McCain.

DaveS on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Obama knows he cannot POSSIBLY withdraw US troops from Iraq if he becomes CinC. He is intentionally LYING and PANDERING to a poll number that want us out of Iraq.

Good point. Neither can Hillary. Does it mean Ann Coulter is right when she says Hillary may be stronger on defense than McCain?

I mean, what’s wrong about lying to the left?

freevillage on February 27, 2008 at 3:05 PM

to which the Messiah responded this morning by reminding him that AQI wouldn’t be in Iraq at all if Saddam Hussein was still around to scare them off. As soon as he gets that time machine built, expect this problem to be solved.

Being the Messiah, raising Saddam from the dead should only be a minor miracle.

tommylotto on February 27, 2008 at 3:05 PM

From the other post, you said:

But I’ve got a funny feeling that if the Afghan “quagmire” drags on until 2010 or 2011, we may yet find out that getting the hell out of dodge ASAP is the surest way to reconcile Karzai and the Taliban, too.

I’ve been saying this for a while. ‘Cause you know that Obama and the rest of the Left are building up to that very thing. That’s what that “ammo shortage” thing was about.

Can’t allow Bush/Republicans/Conservatives any victories, dontcha know. That’s all they care about.

baldilocks on February 27, 2008 at 3:06 PM

If you put B.O. and J.M on the battlefield, who would win?

upinak on February 27, 2008 at 3:06 PM

The Obama strategy is foolish on it’s face. If something like that could work in the real world, the LAPD would redeploy to Sacramento and do ’surgical strikes’ against the gangs.

This is how police works. Guess which three digits on your phone will get you a deployment team at your door.

freevillage on February 27, 2008 at 3:08 PM

“I will not surrender to al Qaeda.”
US Senator John McCain

Second the motion. ABAD – Anybody But A Democrat.

HotAirJosef on February 27, 2008 at 3:08 PM

McCain should push the issue that Obama knows that his plan will lead to a bloodbath, otherwise Obama would not call for a 100k Iraqis to be brought to this country.

rw on February 27, 2008 at 3:08 PM

I didn’t even know this. Nice Hanoi Jane reference too.

One thing I do like about McCain, when asked about energy policy, one of the first words out of his mouth is “nuclear power”. We are so far behind there, it’s pathetic. I blame Jane Fonda and that propaganda piece of crap movie “China Syndrome” she was in.

Paul-Cincy on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:08 PM

As soon as he gets that time machine built, expect this problem to be solved.

I love it. I gotta give it up to Mccain on this issue. He handled himself really well.

Barack Hussein Obama you keep showing the country how naive you really are.

Erockk on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

The general is going to be so much fun. Barrys little tricks will have no effect on the truth.

TroubledMonkey on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

SICK EM’ MAV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

Voidseeker on February 27, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Your depression and dispair over a Maverick victory is becomeing a bit tiresome. Get on the Straight Talk Express and man up.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

what is pwned?

texasgirl on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Hey, the best way to support the troops, and thank them for their sacrifice, is to elect B. Obama as their Commander in Chief.

Cue Twilight Zone music.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:10 PM

He hoisted him with the hope petard.

Consider Obama petarded.

29Victor on February 27, 2008 at 3:11 PM

If you put B.O. and J.M on the battlefield, who would win?

B.O. would deny he was the opponent and berate J.M. for marginalizing the region as a mere ‘battlefield’.

Then M.O. would stab J.M. in the back and give a Black Panther salute.

LimeyGeek on February 27, 2008 at 3:12 PM

Oh, and the Obama prescription of withdrawing to secure areas, etc. is exactly what we were doing in 2005-2006 and it allowed the violence to spiral out of control. So he wants to go back to a failed policy….why?

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:13 PM

REAGAN VS. MONDALE PART TWO

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:13 PM

what is pwned?

texasgirl on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Here.

freevillage on February 27, 2008 at 3:14 PM

texasgirl

pwned is l33t for “owned” which is geek-speek for “soundly defeated.”

29Victor on February 27, 2008 at 3:14 PM

I saw J.M. and thought “Jayne Mansfield” for some strange reason. LOL

LimeyGeek, yikes, but I think that might be an accurate scenario.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:14 PM

LimeyGeek on February 27, 2008 at 3:12 PM

That would probably be the truth.

upinak on February 27, 2008 at 3:14 PM

Here’s the obligatory McCain riposte, to which the Messiah responded this morning by reminding him that AQI wouldn’t be in Iraq at all if Saddam Hussein was still around to scare them off.

How so? Zarqawi was there long before we took Saddam out of power. He didn’t join up with Al-Qaeda until after the war had started, but how can anyone argue that Saddam would have kept out Al-Qaeda if he couldn’t even keep out Zarqawi’s group?

Esthier on February 27, 2008 at 3:15 PM

Ah, we hear the voice of despair again.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Ah, cheer up. At least you won’t be hearing William F. Buckley’s “voice of despair” any more.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:16 PM

what is pwned?

texasgirl on February 27, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Adolescent cyber-gibberish meaning “owned” – originally caused by mis-hitting the “p” on a qwerty keyboard.

Similar nonsense for “pron” (porn) etc.

LimeyGeek on February 27, 2008 at 3:16 PM

Here’s the obligatory McCain riposte, to which the Messiah responded this morning by reminding him that AQI wouldn’t be in Iraq at all if Saddam Hussein was still around to scare them off.

The more obvious point here is that Al Qaeda was already in Iraq during 2002-3 – Hussein did nothing to scare them off. Iraq was already on the way to becoming an alternative haven to Afghanistan.

Obama’s weak grasp of foreign affairs and security poses a great danger

Pax americana on February 27, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Al-Qaeda no longer holds an established base in Iraq (the closest to a “base” was Ramadi at one time) mostly due to the rise of the awakening movement which was aided by our forces. The tribal areas of northwestern Pakistan are a much greater cause for concern. There will come a time when a withdrawal plan from Iraq will need to be implemented to salvage our overstretched military resources. McCain’s plan is too far out, the Dems plan is too fast. Bipartisan politics certainly doesn’t play well with the complexities of something like the Iraq war.

LT Nixon on February 27, 2008 at 3:19 PM

That’s the sound of Obamaland being engulfed by a firestorm

Baphomet on February 27, 2008 at 3:19 PM

Here.

freevillage on February 27, 2008 at 3:14 PM

Thanks. I never knew it’s origin.

Esthier on February 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Ah, cheer up. At least you won’t be hearing William F. Buckley’s “voice of despair” any more.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:16 PM

I always enjoyed listening to WFB. I’ll miss him and his sweaters.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Our troops, basically the same relative handful going over and over again while most Americans are out shopping, who were victorious in 3 weeks in 2003, have been in Iraq for 5 more years trying to get this ever redefined, elusive, sis, boom, bah “Victory!”.

Well, 95 years to go.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Obama 08! Give Hope a Chance! Not only will he end the war, he’ll end the conscription!

TheBigOldDog on February 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM

LT Nixon on February 27, 2008 at 3:19 PM

al-Qaeda was pretty intrenched (I’d call it a base) around Baqubah, Mosul and just south of Baghdad, as well, until just recently. They are still pretty intrenched around Mosul.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:22 PM

For you fellas:

http://atmosfera.blogs.sapo.pt/arquivo/Sophia%20Loren%20Jayne%20Mansfield.jpg

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:22 PM

REAGAN VS. MONDALE PART TWO

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Interesting.

But who electorally is “Reagan” and who is “Mondale” or “Carter” for that matter?

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:23 PM

Ugh. AQ was in Iraq before the invasion. Zarqawi moved his operations there after 9/11. It’s well documented. On the danger posed by Iraq, here’s what David Kay had to say:

I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized. Saddam was not controlling the society any longer. In the marketplace of terrorism and of WMD, Iraq well could have been that supplier if the war had not intervened.

So apparently, B.O hasn’t been paying attention.

Spolitics on February 27, 2008 at 3:24 PM

oops. sorry, I’ll stop being lighthearted and adolescent cyber-gibberishy now.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:24 PM

There is no difference between Obama and McCain, I’m staying home! /s

- The Cat

MirCat on February 27, 2008 at 3:24 PM

he’ll end the conscription!

TheBigOldDog on February 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Obama 08! Give Hope a Chance! Not only will he end the war, he’ll end the conscription!

TheBigOldDog on February 27, 2008 at 3:20 PM

lol. At first read I thought you said “end the constipation”.

McCain’s supporters should be more concerned with ending the constipation.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:25 PM

But who electorally is “Reagan” and who is “Mondale” or “Carter” for that matter?

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:23 PM

Obama is Carter

McCain is neither Reagan nor Mondale.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Im sick and tired of hearing “they werent there before we went” If that is true (I dont think so) then to that I say SO WHAT. They are now. And the people have turned against them. Thats the point. According to the 9/11 commission very cleary in section 12

The resentment of America and the West is deep, even among leaders of relatively successful Muslim states.4
Tolerance, the rule of law, political and economic openness, the extension of greater opportunities to women—these cures must come from within Muslim
societies themselves.The United States must support such developments

thats not code it very clearly says our job is to support the communities that are turning against these savages to stop the cycle. Its not complicated and its working. Maybe Im nieve but I think the Dems get it but just play to the idiots in their base. Sadly past experiences with The Obamas in Washington is not a good sign.

CaptainObvious on February 27, 2008 at 3:27 PM

REAGAN VS. MONDALE PART TWO

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Interesting.

But who electorally is “Reagan” and who is “Mondale” or “Carter” for that matter?

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:23 PM

To your disappointment Mav will be playing the Gipper and Obama will play the guy who got housed by Norm Coleman, right after their native son Paul Wellstone died tragically.

If Obama ever wants to be President he should cook up some family crisis, drop out, let Hillary be the sacraficial goat and try again in 2016 vs. then vp Lindsey Graham. This is what you get for batmouthin’ a War Hero for the past month.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:27 PM

All your Audacity are belong to me… John Sidney McCain

ihasurnominashun on February 27, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Obama is Carter and McGovern 2.0

Kini on February 27, 2008 at 3:27 PM

CHOSEN, wash out your mouth with soap, right now.

vp Lindsey Graham.

That level of profanity should be a bannable offense.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

McCain gets one right every now and again, but he’s a one-trick pony.

waterhouse on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Pssst! I’m gonna whisper this so no one else hears and gets offended. I’ve heard a rumor that al Qaeda may also have some cells here,..apparently they slipped in quietly and may even be enjoying free social services. Ironic, huh?. But, if we fight them over there, we won’t have to fight them over here. Yup,..that’s what I heard.

a capella on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Obama is Carter and McGovern 2.0

Kini on February 27, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Yes, he pulls the same kind of crowds as McGovern.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Juan Planation McCain has Obama topped on that one.

100 hours of picking lettuce at $50 an hour = $5,000.

Bumper sticker by the committee to elect Juan McCain el Presidente America del Norte in 2008:

Vote for Juan and you get an extra $1,000!

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:30 PM

Captain Obvious, I think Hillary gets it, to be honest. Obama? No way.

But she couldn’t use it in the dem primary because the Moveon.org folks really do pretty much control their nominating process.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Sadly, all the candidates neglect Afghanistan – none has it as a major issue on their websites. This is curious considering all the rhetoric from Obama and Clinton about how much Iraq is hurting Afghanistan – if they were so concerned, you’d think they’d at least put an issue page about it on their websites.

To get anything solid on what the candidates have said they’d do takes some digging. I haven’t found anything for Clinton. For Obama, there’s some stuff buried in this long speech:

As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.

We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military — it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.

Above all, I will send a clear message: we will not repeat the mistake of the past, when we turned our back on Afghanistan following Soviet withdrawal. As 9/11 showed us, the security of Afghanistan and America is shared. And today, that security is most threatened by the al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary in the tribal regions of northwest Pakistan.

Most of that GWB is doing or has done. GWB is sending an additional brigade (actually a Marine MAGTF) to Afghanistan this year. So really, the major difference is that Obama would send one more brigade than Bush has – having been to Afghanistan myself, another 3500 troops is not going be the magic pony that solves our problems.

Now, perhaps Obama can use his powers of persuasion to get a greater commitment from NATO – that’s possible given how unpopular Bush is, but the fact remains that Europeans in general don’t want their troops in Afghanistan.

NPP on February 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM

Our troops, basically the same relative handful going over and over again while most Americans are out shopping, who were victorious in 3 weeks in 2003, have been in Iraq for 5 more years trying to get this ever redefined, elusive, sis, boom, bah “Victory!”.

Well, 95 years to go.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Didn’t you listen? Obama will fix it all in Iraq War III. I think he fights Mr T in that one!

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM

One thing I do like about McCain, when asked about energy policy, one of the first words out of his mouth is “nuclear power”. We are so far behind there, it’s pathetic.

I’m glad to hear that he said that. Could he also say ANWAR? Would make voting for him easier.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:39 PM

CHOSEN, wash out your mouth with soap, right now.

vp Lindsey Graham.
That level of profanity should be a bannable offense.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

I was actually hoping Lindsey ran for the Republican nomination, but I’ll settle for a moderate War Hero.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:39 PM

I’ve heard a rumor that al Qaeda may also have some cells here,..apparently they slipped in quietly and may even be enjoying free social services. Ironic, huh?. But, if we fight them over there, we won’t have to fight them over here. Yup,..that’s what I heard.

a capella on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

I heard the same thing, so it must be true.

I am at a loss though to figure out how they could possibly have slipped in though as our borders are so secure.

Maybe they stowed away in some of the gear of our troops who returned from Iraq before going back over yet again. That’s the only thing I can think off.

I think we probably should stop letting the troops come home at all and just keep them over there. That way no more AQ slipping in over here in their gear. Besides it is probably bad for troop morale to keep sending them back to Iraq over and over again anyway, so let’s just keep them there for a hundred years or until they die of old age, whichever comes first.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:41 PM

Bnelson,

al-Qaeda was pretty intrenched (I’d call it a base) around Baqubah, Mosul and just south of Baghdad, as well, until just recently. They are still pretty intrenched around Mosul.

I would say there is some around Mosul and Tal Afar, but they’re freedom to maneuver and orchestrate attacks has been knocked off-balance by the Surge. Hence them using schizophrenic women and homeless people as suicide bombers instead of willing foreign jihadis. While I agree Al-Qaeda is a threat, I don’t like how Sen. McCain over hypes them to the biggest problem in Iraq. A crappy infrastructure overlooked by a very weak government where various groups think it’s okay to shoot at each other in the political process is the biggest issue. If McCain or Obama wanted to get my one stinkin’ vote they’d give a clear way to bring that stability while still keeping in my mind that the military is strapped. No easy task, but hey, being the prez isn’t just hanging out at Camp David 365/year.

LT Nixon on February 27, 2008 at 3:42 PM

REAGAN VS. MONDALE PART TWO

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:13 PM

More like BOB DOLE vs. just about anyone.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:42 PM

From the Rasmussen numbers (summarized by the Campaign Spot):

McCain now leads Obama 46% to 43% and Clinton 48% to 43%.

Obama is viewed favorably by 51% and unfavorably by 46%.

McCain’s numbers are 55% favorable, 42% unfavorable.

Clinton earns positive reviews from 47% of Likely Voters nationwide and negative assessments from 52%.

McCain is trusted more by 55% of voters when it comes to National Security issues. Obama is trusted more by just 30% on this point. Just half (51%) of Democrats express more trust in Obama than McCain on national security.

Unaffiliated voters prefer McCain by a two-to-one margin.

On Iraq, 49% trust McCain while 39% prefer Obama.

When it comes to the economy, 45% prefer McCain while 39% trust Obama more.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:43 PM

Our troops, basically the same relative handful going over and over again while most Americans are out shopping, who were victorious in 3 weeks in 2003, have been in Iraq for 5 more years trying to get this ever redefined, elusive, sis, boom, bah “Victory!”.

Well, 95 years to go.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Ah, we hear the voice of despair again.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Just wondering – are you denying that our troops are returning for their 4th tours of duty? They are.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Didn’t you listen? Obama will fix it all in Iraq War III. I think he fights Mr T in that one!

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2008 at 3:36 PM

I’ll be dead by the time of Iraq War III, as I hear that Iraq War II will last fifty make it a hundred years.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Actions, Not Rhetoric
Here’s the text of a recent ad from He That We Have All Been Waiting For:

OBAMA: I’m Barack Obama, and I approved this message.

OBAMA: If you are ready for change, then we can go ahead and tell the lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda are over.

ANNOUNCER: In the Senate, Barack Obama challenged both parties and passed tough new ethics laws, reining in the power of lobbyists. And he’s the only candidate refusing contributions from PACs and Washington lobbyists who have too much power today.

OBAMA: They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people.

Wow… With that kind of strong, principled rhetoric, there’s no possibility that the candidate would have have gotten millions of dollars for a sweetheart land deal from a British national, is there?

Wrong:

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama’s fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses.

The money transfer raises the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain’s wealthiest men, helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago.

A company related to Mr Auchi, who has a conviction for corruption in France, registered the loan to Mr Obama’s bagman Antoin “Tony” Rezko on May 23 2005. Mr Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million.

Three weeks later, Mr Obama bought a house on the city’s South Side while Mr Rezko’s wife bought the garden plot next door from the same seller on the same day, June 15.

Mr Obama says he never used Mrs Rezko’s still-empty lot, which could only be accessed through his property. But he admits he paid his gardener to mow the lawn.

Mrs Rezko, whose husband was widely known to be under investigation at the time, went on to sell a 10-foot strip of her property to Mr Obama seven months later so he could enjoy a bigger garden.

Mr Obama now admits his involvement in this land deal was a “boneheaded mistake”.

The house-and-garden deal raised questions about whether Mr Rezko, a property developer and fast-food restauranteur, made it possible for the Obamas to purchase a mansion they could otherwise not afford.

Mr Rezko has since been indicted for allegedly scheming to pressure companies seeking business with the state of Illinois for kickbacks and contributions to the governor Rod Blagojevich’s campaign. He goes on trial on March 3.

The New York Times splashes unsubstantiated rumors of concern about suspicions of wrongdoing from disgruntled former employees of the Republican candidate, and we have to travel across the pond to find any kind investigation into this very real scandal on the presumptive Democratic nominee.

Once again, we have Obama talking big about being an agent of change, of ridding politics of undue influence purchased by wealthy donors. Yet his actions speak of business as usual.

by Kavon W. Nikrad

al on February 27, 2008 at 3:45 PM

Prediction: McCain starts tacking left on the war within two months, starting with language about how our decision to invade was “hasty,” followed by language about “milestones” for the Iraqi government. Eventually, he’ll be running on a Nixonian “peace with honor” strategy in the general.

spmat on February 27, 2008 at 3:47 PM

CHOSEN, wash out your mouth with soap, right now.

vp Lindsey Graham.
That level of profanity should be a bannable offense.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

In case no one has figured it out yet, TCO is Lindsey Graham. I have my sources.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:47 PM

Just wondering – are you denying that our troops are returning for their 4th tours of duty? They are.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Oh pipe own you cut-and-run defeatist. Our troops just love going to Iraq. They can’t get enough of it. All the beautiful sexy women, all the great beer. If more people would volunteer for the Army or Marines then they couldn’t get to go as often. Don’t try and ruin a good thing for them.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:49 PM

I’m glad to hear that he said that. Could he also say ANWAR? Would make voting for him easier.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:39 PM

ANWR is a short-term fix that would only have a marginal effect. Nuclear power infrastructure is a much more important long-term priority, especially as we figure out how to wean ourselves off of reliance on fossil fuels for transportation purposes. We’ll probably still be flying aircraft that use fossil fuels for a while, but we’re getting a lot closer to the point where we could all br driving these around.

Big S on February 27, 2008 at 3:53 PM

He’s leaving himself wiggle room…..

He’s leaving himself wiggle room period.

….for any reason.

Watch Obama tack way right in a general, because he or Hillary want to own the winning strategy of fierce national self-defense and low taxes…. (think Bill Clinton bombing an aspirin factory to get Osama Bin Laden and the welfare-to-work program of the ’90′s).

Mcguyver on February 27, 2008 at 3:53 PM

ANWR is a short-term fix that would only have a marginal effect. Nuclear power infrastructure is a much more important long-term priority, especially as we figure out how to wean ourselves off of reliance on fossil fuels for transportation purposes. We’ll probably still be flying aircraft that use fossil fuels for a while, but we’re getting a lot closer to the point where we could all br driving these around.

Big S on February 27, 2008 at 3:53 PM

ALL of the above is fine with me.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:53 PM

Just wondering – are you denying that our troops are returning for their 4th tours of duty? They are.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2008 at 3:44 PM

If they weren’t going to Iraq, they would be going to Afghanistan or some place else (Obama wants to invade Pakistan and send more troops to Afghanistan). This is a long war and no amount of whining is going to make it any shorter. The troops know that. If they aren’t up to it, they don’t reenlist.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:55 PM

a capella on February 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM

They finally learned to speak Spanish facilitating entry.
With the level of illegal alien illiteracy, they don’t have to read or write it. That is a PC offense to require literacy in their supposed mother tongue of illegal aliens. There isn’t even the expectation of English from anyone/everyone in America.

maverick muse on February 27, 2008 at 3:56 PM

sten, bnelson’s son is there now. My husband is military. We understand the horrible problem caused by WJ Clinton’s decision to gut the military active duty force structure. One of GW Bush’s greatest failures has been to not build up those numbers until in the last year.

McCain has talked about how our military is too small for a while. The one who spoke most eloquently about it was Rudy. It’s one reason I like Rudy so much, even though I know his being pro-choice meant the wouldn’t win the nomination.,

But the choice is between Obama and McCain. McCain will build the military. Obama will slash it.

Easy choice.

funky chicken on February 27, 2008 at 3:58 PM

RCP, which uses an average of all recent polls, not just a pick-and-choose one poll, has el joven Mesias ahead of el viejo Juan by 3.7%.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:58 PM

Did he learn that “My Friends” comment from our dear heart Juan Hernandez??? Just Say’in

brtex on February 27, 2008 at 3:59 PM

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:55 PM

The one thing the troops have as opposed to the rest of the nation is a since of history and the men that came before them.

Also, since they are over there so often I with the goddamn USO would get off their ass and send some real talent over there. Maybe like ACDC, Metallica, WWE, Ultimate Fighting, Monster Trucks, and the Southwest airline sluts.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 3:59 PM

The troops know that. If they aren’t up to it, they don’t reenlist.

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 3:55 PM

Yes, they volunteered, so just F-em.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 4:01 PM

RCP, which uses an average of all recent polls, not just a pick-and-choose one poll, has el joven Mesias ahead of el viejo Juan by 3.7%.

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:58 PM

So you average good polls with bad polls and you somehow get an excellent poll?

bnelson44 on February 27, 2008 at 4:01 PM

MB4 on February 27, 2008 at 3:58 PM

Someone didn’t read Captain Ed’s story yesterday on the Times poll and today on the LA Times poll that keep f’n up that RCP average. Get your head out of the sand!

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 27, 2008 at 4:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2