McCain continues to struggle with troop-level confusion

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Last week, John McCain made one of his more embarrassing recent errors, telling a Wisconsin audience that U.S. forces in Iraq "have drawn down to pre-surge levels." That's clearly false.

McCain and his campaign compounded the problem by insisting he was right about troop levels — reality notwithstanding — and arguing that everyone was "nitpicking" by suggesting his comments about his signature issue should be accurate. His aides eventually tried to make this a semantics debate, suggesting McCain would have been right if we disregard "verb tense."

While McCain and his cohorts insisted that his obvious error wasn't an error at all, the senator nevertheless changed his rhetoric yesterday. That's the good news. The bad news is, McCain's still wrong.

"[Gen. Petraeus] is gonna come back in July, when our drawdown from the surge," McCain said. Three of the five brigades are already back. There's two more brigades that will coming back at the end of July…. But we are drawing back down from the surge. And then in July, he said that he wants to pause."

Except we're not really "drawing back down from the surge." Before the surge, there were 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. There are 155,000 now. In July, there will be 140,000.

This isn't a debate over "verb tense." At the end of the current drawdown, we'll have more U.S. troops in Iraq than before the surge began. McCain may find that politically inconvenient, but that doesn't make his claims any less false.

And people are beginning to notice.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/

[Gaby&Talbert 1]

Last week, John McCain made one of his more embarrassing recent errors, telling a Wisconsin audience that U.S. forces in Iraq "have drawn down to pre-surge levels." That's clearly false.

McCain and his campaign compounded the problem by insisting he was right about troop levels — reality notwithstanding — and arguing that everyone was "nitpicking" by suggesting his comments about his signature issue should be accurate. His aides eventually tried to make this a semantics debate, suggesting McCain would have been right if we disregard "verb tense."

While McCain and his cohorts insisted that his obvious error wasn't an error at all, the senator nevertheless changed his rhetoric yesterday. That's the good news. The bad news is, McCain's still wrong.

"[Gen. Petraeus] is gonna come back in July, when our drawdown from the surge," McCain said. Three of the five brigades are already back. There's two more brigades that will coming back at the end of July…. But we are drawing back down from the surge. And then in July, he said that he wants to pause."

Except we're not really "drawing back down from the surge." Before the surge, there were 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. There are 155,000 now. In July, there will be 140,000.

This isn't a debate over "verb tense." At the end of the current drawdown, we'll have more U.S. troops in Iraq than before the surge began. McCain may find that politically inconvenient, but that doesn't make his claims any less false.

And people are beginning to notice.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/

It will be interesting to see what will happen in the middle east in January 2009 after a new president takes office.

I wonder if America thinks that if Obama wins that all our troops will be home in a week?

[HAL 9000 96]

Last week, John McCain made one of his more embarrassing recent errors, telling a Wisconsin audience that U.S. forces in Iraq "have drawn down to pre-surge levels." That's clearly false.

McCain and his campaign compounded the problem by insisting he was right about troop levels — reality notwithstanding — and arguing that everyone was "nitpicking" by suggesting his comments about his signature issue should be accurate. His aides eventually tried to make this a semantics debate, suggesting McCain would have been right if we disregard "verb tense."

While McCain and his cohorts insisted that his obvious error wasn't an error at all, the senator nevertheless changed his rhetoric yesterday. That's the good news. The bad news is, McCain's still wrong.

"[Gen. Petraeus] is gonna come back in July, when our drawdown from the surge," McCain said. Three of the five brigades are already back. There's two more brigades that will coming back at the end of July…. But we are drawing back down from the surge. And then in July, he said that he wants to pause."

Except we're not really "drawing back down from the surge." Before the surge, there were 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. There are 155,000 now. In July, there will be 140,000.

This isn't a debate over "verb tense." At the end of the current drawdown, we'll have more U.S. troops in Iraq than before the surge began. McCain may find that politically inconvenient, but that doesn't make his claims any less false.

And people are beginning to notice.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/

It will be interesting to see what will happen in the middle east in January 2009 after a new president takes office.

I wonder if America thinks that if Obama wins that all our troops will be home in a week?

I'm sure McCain's spin doctors will try to take it that way so as to paint a picture of chaos as they have so prophetized thus far as an argument to stay the course.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It will be interesting to see what will happen in the middle east in January 2009 after a new president takes office.

I wonder if America thinks that if Obama wins that all our troops will be home in a week?

Hopefully those who support either candidate will know just what their candidate has said about Iraq.

I'm not sure what McCain's official plan is, but here's a paragraph from Obama's website...

Bringing Our Troops Home

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/#bring-home

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

Hopefully those who support either candidate will know just what their candidate has said about Iraq.

I'm not sure what McCain's official plan is, but here's a paragraph from Obama's website...

Bringing Our Troops Home

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/#bring-home

just one small problem with that........combat brigades don't include all the support personnel there.......we gonna leave all the cs and css people behind?

[Gaby&Talbert 1]

All I have to say is lets just see what really happens after we get a new president. I would bet every penny I have that what they say they will do now and what they actually do are two completely different things. What about Afganistan? Will Obama also take us out of there? There has never been peace there and their never will be. At least Iraq has oil and like other middle eastern countries with oil there might be a chance they could pull things together there but what is there in Afganistan?

[HAL 9000 96]

All I have to say is lets just see what really happens after we get a new president. I would bet every penny I have that what they say they will do now and what they actually do are two completely different things. What about Afganistan? Will Obama also take us out of there? There has never been peace there and their never will be. At least Iraq has oil and like other middle eastern countries with oil there might be a chance they could pull things together there but what is there in Afganistan?

Very good questions. I don't think we'll be out of Afghanistan in the immediate future. I guess that is part of the logical sense of going after the actual enemies we needed to go after- Talibans not so necessarily but their refusal to hand over OBL and his AQ machinery. That is what clinched the war over there. Iraq is a wholly different ballgame, so if anything you should be betting on two different things.