The following op-ed (slightly edited), was submitted to dozens and dozens of newspapers, in late September, 2008. It makes a very relevant case, and is reasonably informative on matters where the public was highly misinformed.
It’s not a big deal that it was not published. What is a big deal is that there was very little like it, that was published.
Some Straight Talk on Iraq, and the First Presidential Debate (September 27, 2008)
“I went to Iraq in 2003 and came back and said, we’ve got to change this strategy.” So stated John McCain, in last night’s presidential debate from Oxford, Mississippi.
In the debate, McCain also stated; “let’s be clear and have some straight talk.” So let’s be clear. Here is what McCain stated regarding Iraq, in 2003:
“But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators.” [NBC, 3/20/03]. “It’s clear that the end is very much in sight.” [ABC, 4/9/03].
More notably; “there’s not a history of clashes that are violent between Sunnis and Shiahs. So I think they can probably get along.” [MSNBC, 4/23/03]. Yet the most endemic problem in Iraq is the long standing hatred between Sunni and Shiite. This is something that was known before we went into Iraq, and them not “getting along” has been the most consequential challenge standing in the way of helping to instill a peaceful working democracy in that country.
McCain has also put a lot of emphasis on the “surge,” as constituting our key change in strategy. It was not. According to Bob Woodward’s widely acclaimed new book, “The War Within,” published earlier this month, the most important factor was a change in covert strategy, representing identification and isolation techniques not even contemplated in 2003. And with respect to troop levels, prior to the war McCain stated “I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past.” [CBS, 9/15/02].
In April of 2003, two weeks after stating that “it’s clear that the end is very much in sight,” and exactly eight days before Bush infamously stood on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln below a banner proclaiming “mission accomplished,” McCain appeared to disagree with calls to get more international troops on the ground in Iraq, stating, “I think that the only military presence required right now would be American and British.” [MSNBC, 4/23/03] Three months later, in mid July, 2003, McCain called Iraq a “magnificent victory.“ [MSNBC 7/23/03]
In November, 2003 McCain stated “We are winning in Iraq.” [11/5/2003, press release] In December, 2003, he stated, “This is a mission accomplished.” [ABC, 12/14/03] Three months later, in early ‘04, far from arguing that we needed to change our strategy, McCain stated, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” [ABC, 3/7/04] And roughly a year before violence arguably peaked, McCain pronounced, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.” [The Hill, 12/8/05]
In an interview on CNN, on August 17, 2007, McCain also asserted: “I was the greatest critic of the initial four years, three and a half years. I came back from my first trip to Iraq and said, this is going to fail. We’ve got to change the strategy to the one we’re using now.”
This change in strategy was not implemented in 2003, and would not be for more than three years. Yet the person who today is the “greatest critic of the initial four years,” back in April of ‘03 stated that Sunni and Shiah’s would get along, that we did not need higher troop levels, that “the end was very much in sight,” in November of ‘03, far from stating that “this is going to fail” asserted “we are winning,” in December of ‘03 stated “mission accomplished,” in early ‘04 stated “I’m confident we’re on the right course,” and in ‘05 argued that we need to stay, rather than change, the course.
In the presidential debate last night, moderator Jim Lehrer asked Senator McCain; “Do you agree with that, the lesson of Iraq?”
McCain replied; “The next president of the United States is not going to have to address the issue as to whether we went into Iraq or not. ”
While this is true, what is far more important is that the next President of the United States is going to have to decide how to engage internationally, and when, if and how we use our military. And thus the judgment exhibited with respect to prior such decisions, should be very much of concern today.
McCain’s record on Afghanistan was not any better.
We’re fans of McCain, as a person, and as a Senator. But we have over 300 million people in America. Only one becomes President at any one time. If that person is being promulgated as a vaunted foreign policy and military strategy expert, the facts should at least be examined.
Instead, it was in large part this same media, which did the vaunting, rather than the examining. Here’s even a leading conservative think tank that did something that our “Fourth Estate” media largely couldn’t do; namely, examine McCain’s record and foreign policy judgment, rather than simply bow to his legend.