Ringing Hollow On Iraq

by Steve Soto

In less than two days, we will observe the fifth anniversary of Bush's legally-flawed justification for starting the war against Iraq. And after five years and recent alleged successes, the Los Angeles Times noted the obvious today:

A female suicide bomber killed 36 people and a roadside bomb claimed the lives of two U.S. soldiers today as U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and Republican Sen. John McCain sought to draw attention to successes in Iraq on separate visits to the country.

[snip]

The bombing occurred after McCain, the likely Republican candidate for U.S. president, and Cheney, traveling separately, made near identical claims about the success of the U.S. troop buildup last year that helped cool the country's sectarian war. McCain was believed to have already left the country.

With McCain, all that matters is whether or not the perceived reduction in violence can be spun as a justification for maintaining the status quo, with no talk of troop reductions or missing Iraqi political reconciliation ever passing his lips. Any talk of reducing troops automatically leads to the usual "surrendering to Al Qaeda" red herring from McCain, who has gotten a free pass from the media on Iraq.

At least someone just a while ago finally took him to task for this:

(Senator Clinton) delivered a speech in Washington dedicated completely to the war in Iraq, saying she would begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 60 days of taking office, should she win. And she attacked both Mr. Obama and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the likely Republican nominee.

In attacking Mr. McCain, Mrs. Clinton noted that he had at one point said he would be comfortable with the United States having a presence in Iraq for 100 years. With Mr. Obama, she noted that Samantha Powers, a former senior foreign policy adviser, had been quoted as telling a British newspaper that Mr. Obama’s schedule for withdrawal outlined on the campaign trail would not be what he would necessarily follow in the White House.

“One choice in this election is Senator McCain, who is willing to keep this war going for 100 years,” Mrs. Clinton said. “You can count on him to do that. Another choice is Senator Obama, who has promised to bring combat troops out in 16 months. But according to his foreign policy adviser, you can’t count on him to do that.”

Although it may be too late and comes a month after I first suggested she run against both of them on Iraq, her campaign finally sees some value in not running away from the past on Iraq and instead drawing distinctions about the future. It would have been nice if she had done this weeks ago instead of fluff McCain as a commander in chief.