RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
McCain Shifts Position on More US Troops to Afghanistan
July 15, 2008 5:20 PM
While Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, was seeming defensive on Iraq today, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was changing his position on Afghanistan.
Just last week, McCain was calling for the U.S.'s NATO allies to increase their troop presence in Afghanistan and was resisting calls for more U.S. troops there. “I would like to have our allies make a bigger commitment, both in personnel and other ways,” McCain said in Portsmouth, Ohio. “I’d like to hear from our military leaders, our chairman of the joint chiefs, as well as the military commanders there.”
McCain foreign policy aide Randy Scheunemann told the Boston Globe that there needed to be more NATO troops, and "there is no easy answer, but clearly Pakistan needs to do more to crack down there."
This was quite a contrast from Obama, who since August 2007 has been calling for at least two additional U.S. brigades in Afghanistan.
A contrast, that is…until today.
"Our commanders on the ground in Afghanistan say that they need at least three additional brigades," McCain said today at a town hall in Albuquerque. "Thanks to the success of the surge, these forces are becoming available, and our commanders in Afghanistan must get them."
During a trip to Afghanistan in 2006, McCain resisted such a call, saying when asked if more US troops were needed, "If it's necessary, we will, and I'm sure we would be agreeable, but the focus here is more on training the Afghan National Army and the police, as opposed to the increased U.S. troop presence."
Speaking to reporters on his bus today after his speech, McCain rejected the notion that he and Obama have similar plans for the region.
"He's just said we need more troops," McCain said. "There is a dramatic difference. He's never been to Afghanistan, he's never been briefed on Afghanistan personally by the commanders." Moreover, McCain asserted, Obama doesn't see the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as connected, as does McCain.
"If we fail in Iraq, it would have meant enormous encouragement to the Taliban in Afghanistan and other anti-American elements and jihadists throughout the region," McCain said. "And so to say, we could have let Iraq fail, as Senator Obama said,...that would have had a devastating effect in my view on our reliability in the region, that the willingness of our allies to cooperate with us in Afghanistan, and so they are connected. In life and warfare, failure breeds failure, success breeds success. That is just a lesson of history, and Senator Obama obviously does not understand those lessons."
McCain also repeated a charge first made by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, against Obama -- that he chairs a Foreign Affairs subcommittee with oversight over NATO operations and yet "he's never had a hearing. He's never had a hearing. So I am not surprised that all he has done is said, 'Well, we need more troops.'"
Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joe Biden, D-Del, rejected that accusation in a statement to ABC News. "The reason Senator Obama didn’t chair a NATO and Afghanistan subcommittee hearing is because I did, as Chairman of the Committee….when it comes to the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq, we hold those hearings at the full committee level,” he said.
- jpt
July 15, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (106)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
AkaDad - the count on McCain's flip-flops is now up to 70! Of course, that was yesterday's total - McCain pulled another one today. The self-professed candidate of “straight talk” and “experience” spent today changing his position on gay adoption, adopting Senator Obama’s position that we need more troops in Afghanistan after having resisted taking that position, flip flopping on whether he’d send U.S. or NATO troops (he actually offered three different explanations on where those additional troops would come from), and referring to a country that hasn’t existed since 1992 for the second time in two days.
Posted by: sandy | Jul 15, 2008 10:42:08 PM
The reason why the media gives McCain a pass when he flip flops or shows his age with mis-quotes or appears dumbfounded when ask questions about Viagra or etc....has everything to do with making this election competitive. If the media devoted as much attention to McCain's every step the way they do toward Obama the Republican party would be forced to forfeit this election.
Posted by: peoples_prez | Jul 15, 2008 10:29:48 PM
McCain graduated from the US Naval Academy 894th in a class of 899. He wrecked five jets before they finally got rid of him. Obviously he is not the brightest bulb on the tree. He was shot down by an out-of-date Soviet missile by men with no experience in anti-aircraft warfare because he did not follow the rules of evasion taught at the Academy. Let's just say the man has only one oar in the water.
He disses two in five people on the face of the earth by referring to all Asians as “Gooks.” He may be viewed as a “hero,” but I don’t think being shot down qualifies him for the job of president.
Posted by: rhbate | Jul 15, 2008 10:12:18 PM
John's conscience:
Not to mention that the government can no longer sneeze without fueling the Chinese economy. Who is it that we owe most of our money to? We should be deathly worried that China may eventually no longer need us.
Posted by: Nick B | Jul 15, 2008 10:11:07 PM
"He's never been to Afghanistan, he's never been briefed on Afghanistan personally by the commanders." McCain
Based on this reasoning, I suppose Roosevelt should have gone to Poland and France before deciding to enter WWll>
Posted by: rhbate | Jul 15, 2008 10:09:50 PM
What is the *real* reason that John McCain advocated surrendering Afghanistan to the Taliban, as he has sense the beginning of the Iraq war?
Could it be that John McCain is loyal to the America's enemies?
Posted by: John's conscience | Jul 15, 2008 10:08:32 PM
Besides getting more of our troops killed, how will McSame be different than Bush? Is Phil Graham McSame's brain? Face it..this man is senile and incompetent. After looking stupid to the world the past 8 years, it will be refreshing to have an articulate and intelligent commander that I can be proud of again; one that can at least read a tele prompter.
Posted by: dmac | Jul 15, 2008 10:08:32 PM
Wisdom You have the wisdom of a republican Rush Limbaugh listener. Obama said when having conversations with immigrant communities in the wake of 9/11 his meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, have been of an urgent quality. They have stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly. Therefore he has reassured them that he will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction. This simply means he would not allow our government to mistreat these Americans any more than he would allow any other group or type of people to be persecuted by our government. Obama is a man to be admired for standing up for us all.
Posted by: Vicki | Jul 15, 2008 10:03:50 PM
West Coast Messenger:
Get your facts straight. Those 'present' votes? Yeah, those amounted to maybe 1-3% of his total votes cast, and most of the time--for instance on an anti-abortion bill--that was what the pro-choice groups wanted him to do.
Posted by: Nick B | Jul 15, 2008 10:01:55 PM
Obama leads McSame in every category except foriegn policy, which McSame leads in simply because he is old and has been in Washington all his life. What will McCain do? Whatever GW wants him to do. What's the difference between McSame and Bush,,,just ask Mark Sanford. Want more of the same.....stay loyal to your party instead of your common sense. This has been the worst 8 years of my life, and I want nothing that even resembles GW for the next 8-years. Nothing against the man, but his time has come and gone.
Obama will follow the direction of his cabinet, fresh ideas and competency, not the out of touch Phil Graham and Lieberman type.
Posted by: dmac | Jul 15, 2008 10:00:33 PM
WestCoastMessenger - Experience doesn't count for much when the principle is wrong. 26 years of experience should have taught McCain better. The concept of doing the same thing over and over and over, hoping for a different outcome doesn't make it right.
This election is about Judgment. Repeatedly, Obama is showing significantly better judgment on issues than McCain. This most recent flip-flop of McCain's is just one more in a long line of 'shifts'. The last thing we need is a POTUS that continues the experience we've seen the past 7 years. More of the same isn't good enough.
Posted by: millie | Jul 15, 2008 9:54:29 PM
Hearings on Afghanistan were held at the COMMITTEE level.
Are Republicans mearly ignorant, or just willing to tell any lie?
Posted by: John's conscience | Jul 15, 2008 9:51:49 PM
Mccain flip flops and the media ignores him.He is so incompetent!
Posted by: Ndali | Jul 15, 2008 9:50:47 PM
Wasn't Obama supposed to be looking into more troops being supplied by NATO? You know, the committee he was supposed to be chairing? Any progress on that, or has Biden been doing it for him? It looks like Obama failed in that responsibility. McCain is reminding him of what he should have been doing as chair of that committee. And just why do we even need to stay in Afghanistan? Do as Ron Paul suggested and the get the h**l out of the Middle East! Let them blow all of us up together! Easy solutions for simple minds, huh?
Posted by: georgia | Jul 15, 2008 9:48:28 PM
Is this now 63 or 64 flip-flops for McCain? I've lost track.
Posted by: AkaDad | Jul 15, 2008 9:47:58 PM
These left wing liberal views on Afghanistan that McCain is now showing are just the influence of that ex-democrat Joe Lieberman. McCain's campaign is being infiltrated with radical ideas from within.
Posted by: abram | Jul 15, 2008 9:45:13 PM
Hey Millie,
Right, Obama was talking about an increase in troops for Afgahnistan when he was an Illinois state senator voting present all the time. Experience you can count on.
=======================================
Obama and trust -- don't count on it.
=======================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Jul 15, 2008 9:44:15 PM
McCain outpolls Obama 72 to 48 on the commander-in-chief attribute. It looks like he is more trustworthy than Obama. I don't support McCain, but I don't trust Obama on making commander-in-chief decisions or anything else. I'd like to see Hillary back in the race so we have a better choice. She should consider jumping back in since Obama has reneged on the promises he made when he was attempting to steal votes from Hillary.
========================================
Obama -- just messin' with you man!!!!!
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Jul 15, 2008 9:41:52 PM
I say will all vote for General Custer
Mcbush will set us free..if not in this
World then in the Next....
The US Military should have reported
and got more troops before ...
how is it Obama called for it
almost a year before Mcbush?
Posted by: Anita Yova | Jul 15, 2008 9:41:02 PM
The big difference is that McCain decides policy and policy changes after he has been to the war zone and spoke with the commanders...not before.
O'Carter continually tries to decide policy prior to getting pertinent information, then he has to reverse himself and "shift emphasis."
Whatever term is used by whatever campaign, weaseling out is what it amounts to.
Posted by: Jayhawk | Jul 15, 2008 9:39:48 PM
Post a comment


