McCain - "Obama On The War"

"This point cannot be emphasized enough: Obama, in opposing the surge, was wrong on the most important politico-military decision since the war began. He not only opposed the surge, he predicted in advance that it could not succeed and that it would not lead to a decrease in violence." --Commentary's Peter Wehner

Obama On The War
Peter Wehner
Commentary
July 14, 2008

In his New York Times op-ed today on Iraq, Barack Obama makes several claims worth examining.

In his opening paragraph, Obama writes:

The call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated, and that is needed for long-term success in Iraq and the security interests of the United States.

A phased redeployment of combat troops can now be done in the context of a victory in Iraq, whereas when Obama first called for the complete withdrawal of all combat troops in Iraq by March 2008, it would have led to an American defeat. It is because President Bush endorsed a counterinsurgency plan which Senator Obama fiercely opposed that we are in a position to both withdraw additional combat troops and prevail in Iraq.

Obama goes on to write:

In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda - greatly weakening its effectiveness.

But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we've spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq's leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge ... Only by redeploying our troops can we press the Iraqis to reach comprehensive political accommodation and achieve a successful transition to Iraqis' taking responsibility for the security and stability of their country.

This point cannot be emphasized enough: Obama, in opposing the surge, was wrong on the most important politico-military decision since the war began. He not only opposed the surge, he predicted in advance that it could not succeed and that it would not lead to a decrease in violence (on January 10, 2007, the night President Bush announced the surge, Obama declared he saw nothing in the plan that would "make a significant dent in the sectarian violence that's taking place there." A week later, he repeated the point emphatically: the surge strategy would "not prove to be one that changes the dynamics significantly.")

Both predictions were demonstrably wrong. And for Obama to state that Iraq's leaders "have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge" is misleading and false. Iraqi leaders have reached comprehensive political accommodations, including passing key laws having to do with provincial elections, the distribution of resources, amnesty, pensions, investment, and de-Ba'athification. In fact, a report card issued in May judged that Iraq's efforts on 15 of 18 benchmarks are "satisfactory" -- almost twice of what it determined to be the case a year ago. Is Obama unaware of these achievements? Does he care at all about them?

In addition, Prime Minister Maliki, a Shiite Muslim, has taken to lead in opposing Shiite militia throughout Iraq, which in turn has led in a rallying of political support for Maliki throughout Iraq and respect for him among other Arab leaders.

The successful, Iraqi-led operations in Basra, Sadr City, and elsewhere completely subvert Obama's claim that "only be redeploying our troops" can these things be achieved. They are in fact being achieved, something which would have been impossible if Obama's "redeployment" plan had been put in place.

Obama writes this as well:

for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.

In fact, it is far from clear that Iraq will be judged a strategic blunder at all, let alone the "greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy." It is now plausible to argue that the Iraq war will lead to a defeat of historic proportions for al Qaeda. It has already triggered a massive Sunni Muslim uprising against al Qaeda, a repudiation of violent jihadism from some of its original architects, and a significant shift within the Muslim world against the brutal tactics of jihadists. Iraq is also, right now, the only authentic democracy in the Arab world. And Saddam Hussein, the most aggressive and destabilizing force in the Middle East for the last several decades, is dead, and his genocidal regime is now but an awful, infamous memory.

This is not to deny that huge mistakes and miscalculations were made in the Phase IV planning of the war; it is to say, however, that those mistakes have been rectified and that we are now on the road to success in Iraq. None of this would have been possible if Senator Obama's recommendations had been followed. It's worth adding, I suppose, that if Obama's recommendations had been followed, the results would qualify as the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy.

Finally, Obama writes this:

on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war.

This is in some ways the most revealing statement written by Obama. He still cannot bring himself to say that the mission in Iraq is success, even when success is clearly within our grasp. For Obama the mission is, and since his presidential announcement in February 2007 has been, to end the war, even if it means an American loss of epic proportions. And if Obama had had his way, that is exactly what would have come to pass.

Among the most striking things about Obama's op-ed is how intellectually dishonest it is, particularly for a man who once proudly proclaimed that he would let facts rather than preconceived views dictate his positions on Iraq. Obama's op-ed is the effort of an arrogant and intellectually rigid man, one who disdains empirical evidence and is attempting to justify the fact that he has been consistently wrong on Iraq since the war began (for more, see my April 2008 article in Commentary, "Obama's War").

Senator Obama is once again practicing the "old politics" he claims to stand against, which is bad enough. But that Obama would have allowed America to lose, al Qaeda and Iran to win, and the Iraqi people to suffer mass death and possibly genocide because of his ideological opposition to the war is far worse. On those grounds alone, he ought to be disqualified from being America's next commander-in-chief.

Read The Column.

BIDEN: BUSH IRAQ POLICY ONLY HELPS BIN LADEN

Osama Bin Laden sent a new message to his followers over the weekend. In it, he tried to rally support by claiming that the United States wants to control Iraq’s oil and to build permanent military bases in Iraq to dominate the region. Bin Laden claimed, “America seeks, alongside its agents in the region, to create an allied government ... that would accept in advance the presence of major U.S. bases in Iraq and give the Americans all they wish of Iraq's oil.” [Washington Post, 12/29/07]



For two years, Sen. Joe Biden has led the effort to put Congress on record that the United States will not build permanent military bases in Iraq and does not seek to control its oil. As a result, none of the funding that Congress gave to the President for Iraq last year could be used for those purposes.Sen. Biden has repeatedly pressed President Bush to clearly state U.S. policy in order to dispel the widespread belief in Iraq and across the Middle East that the United States intends to build permanent bases and to control Iraq’s energy resources. The President has refused to make a clear statement of U.S. policy. For example, the Defense Authorization bill he vetoed this week included a provision barring the construction of permanent U.S. bases that Senator Biden originated.



Sen. Biden issued the following statement:“The President’s failure to make it clear that we will not build permanent military bases in Iraq and do not seek to control its oil, has handed Bin Laden a huge propaganda tool that allows him to enlist new recruits and makes the world more dangerous. President Bush has steadfastly refused to heed my call on this critical issue as seen in his veto of the Defense bill that included my language that the United States will have no permanent military bases in Iraq. “I call on the President to state clearly and unequivocally, once and for all, that the United States will not build permanent military bases in Iraq and does not seek to control Iraq’s oil. With each passing day, the American people witness the negative consequences of this White House’s failed diplomacy. It is time for a change in Washington.”



Biden Sponsored Amendment to Bar Permanent Bases in Iraq. In May 2006 and again in August 2006, Senator Biden sponsored an amendment that was agreed to in the Senate by voice vote. The first provided “that no funds made available by title I of this Act may be made available to establish permanent United States military bases in Iraq or to exercise control by the United States over the oil infrastructure or oil resources of Iraq.” [S.AMDT.3855, agreed to in Senate by voice vote on 5/3/06; S.AMDT.4423, agreed to in Senate by unanimous consent on 6/22/06; S.AMDT.4851, agreed to in Senate by unanimous consent on 8/3/06]


The Washington Post reported, “The Senate also approved by voice vote an amendment by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) putting the chamber on record as opposing permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq and U.S. control of the country's natural resources.” [Washington Post, 5/4/06]


According to Army Times, “The Senate approved an amendment to the 2007 defense appropriations bill sponsored by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., barring U.S. government funds from being used to establish any facility in Iraq for permanent stationing of U.S. armed forces or exercise U.S. control over Iraqi oil resources.” [Army Times, August 2006]

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: "WHY ROMNEY IS RIGHT FOR IOWA, AMERICA

"Why Romney Is Right For Iowa, America"Townhall By Doug Wilson
December 31, 2007
…
"About this time last year I carefully evaluated the candidates for the GOP nomination. It was a nerve-rattling experience, particularly in the still-fresh wake of the 2006 elections that swept Democrats to power. I considered many factors in selecting a candidate, but two in particular stand out a year later. First, I wanted to support a candidate who would unify the Republican coalition. Second, I wanted to support a candidate with a track record of extraordinary leadership.

"I found such a candidate in Mitt Romney."
…
"In evaluating the candidates, I determined that Governor Romney is the best candidate to unify the Republican coalition – and therefore the most likely to defeat Clinton or Obama in November. He is a strong military conservative who has spoken eloquently and forcefully about the threat of radical Islam; he is a dependable economic conservative who wants to extend the Bush tax cuts and believes in the power of free markets and free trade; finally, he is a social conservative who understands the importance of family values and a culture of life. In short, he is a friend to – and a unifier of – all three parts of the Republican coalition."
…
" But only one candidate, Governor Romney, has the breadth of leadership experience that I believe our next president needs.

"Governor Romney not only has government leadership experience as Massachusetts’ former chief executive, but he also has private sector leadership experience. Governor Romney spent the majority of his career at Bain Capital, building a world-renowned private investment firm that helped birth companies such as Staples and Domino’s Pizza. He also rescued the Salt Lake City Olympics from an ethics scandal, thereby bringing honor to our country with one of the finest Games in recent memory.

"It is Governor Romney’s experience at Bain and the Olympics that truly sets him apart from his competitors. He has seen, firsthand, the ups and downs of the business world. He understands the symbiotic relationship between competition and efficiency, and grasps the detrimental impact that high taxes and government regulation have on businesses. Most importantly, he has made a career, both in the private and public sector, of making the touch decisions, of being the person with whom the buck stops."

…
"Governor Romney’s ability to unify the Republican coalition and to provide effective leadership on his first day in the White House differentiate him from his GOP competitors, and position him to beat the Democratic nominee in November. I urge my fellow Republicans in Iowa and elsewhere to support the right man at the right time for our country: Governor Mitt Romney."
Doug Wilson is chairman of Townhall.com, a California co-chair of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, an advisor to the Heritage Foundation, and co-author of Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today.

To read the full endorsement, please see: www.townhall.com

GOVERNOR ROMNEY ANNOUNCES THE NEW HAMPSHIRE LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP TEAM

Today, Governor Mitt Romney announced the New Hampshire Romney for President Legislative Leadership Team. These 40 Republican legislators represent citizens from across the Granite State and will play an instrumental role in building on Governor Romney's strong grassroots support there.

"I'm honored to have the support of so many New Hampshire Republican leaders. Their help will be invaluable as we work unite Ronald Reagan's Conservative Coalition. Together, we can make America better by strengthening our military, our economy, and our families," Governor Romney said.

New Hampshire House Republican Leader Mike Whalley said, "Governor Romney has run a campaign that respects the New Hampshire people, primary and process. He is a conservative leader on the issues that are important to voters in our state, and we know he will continue the fight to keep taxes low and cut government spending. Our endorsement of Governor Romney is evidence of his hard work and together we will help him get out the vote in the final days of the campaign."

New Hampshire Romney For President Legislative Leadership Team:

Belknap County:

Rep. William Tobin, Sanbornton
House Republican Leader Mike Whalley, Alton
Carroll County:

Rep. Christopher Ahlgren, Wolfeboro
Rep. William Denley, Wakefield
Rep. Harry Merrow, Ossippee
Rep. Betsey Patten, Moultonborough
Rep. Stanley Stevens, Wolfeboro
Cheshire County:

Rep. Stephen Pelkey, Jaffrey
Grafton County:

Rep. Vernon Dingman, Haverhill
Hillsborough County:

Rep. Larry Emerton, Goffstown
Rep. Richard Fletcher, Goffstown
Rep. Ken Hawkins, Bedford
Rep. William Infantine, Manchester
Rep. Shawn Jasper, Hudson
Rep. Pamela Manney, Goffstown
Rep. Pamela Price, Nashua
Rep. Maurice Villeneuve, Bedford
Merrimack County:

Rep. Eric Anderson, Bow
Rep. David Boutin, Hooksett
Rep. Charlie Humphries, Hooksett
Rockingham County:

Rep. Ronald Belanger, Salem
Rep. David Bettencourt, Salem
Rep. David Dalrymple, Salem
Rep. Anthony DiFruscia, Windham
Rep. Marilinda Garcia, Salem
Rep. Mary Griffin, Windham
Rep. James Headd, Auburn
Rep. Paul Hopfgarten, Derry
Rep. George Katsakiores, Derry
Rep. Phyllis Katsakiores, Derry
Sen. Bob Letourneau, Derry
Rep. Norm Major, Plaistow
Rep. Charles McMahon, Windham
Rep. Ronald Nowe, Epping
Rep. Mark Pearson, Salem
Rep. James Rausch, Derry
Rep. Everett Weare, Seabrook
Rep. David Welch, Kingston
Rep. Rick Wickson, Derry
Sullivan County:

Rep. Beverly Rodeschin, Newport

Romney: IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: SIOUX CITY JOURNAL ENDORSES GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY

Sioux City Journal Endorsement
Editorial
December 23, 2007

"At a time when the challenges we face as a nation are formidable, complex, divisive, political and dangerous, America needs a leader with energy, intellect, vision, charisma and experience.

"In his party's field of presidential candidates, Mitt Romney stands out as such an individual. Today we endorse Romney as the Republican we support in the Jan. 3 Iowa Caucuses.

"Romney combines an outsider's new face with a proven track record of success as an executive in both the private and public sectors."
…

"Personally, he is engaging, even charming, he has shown an ability to reach across partisan divides, and he is passionate on the campaign trail. In terms of leadership qualities, he possesses 'it,' and the importance of 'it' should not be diminished."
…

"In order to win his party's nomination and compete in the general election, Romney first must prove he's conservative enough, of course. Whether the subject is national defense, economics or social issues, his conservative credentials are strong."
…

"Having earned an MBA from Harvard Business School, founded his own venture capital and investment company, managed the Olympic Games and run a state in which the Legislature is some 85 percent Democratic, Romney understands economic principles, the intricacies of reform in areas such as education and health care, and the essential need to work with the other side. It's reasonable to say the economy and budget of Massachusetts were in dramatically better shape when he left office than when he entered, that the once-troubled 2002 Winter Olympics were transformed into a profitable success under his watch."
…

"Finally, the 60-year-old Romney – son of the late George Romney, a three-term governor of Michigan and secretary of Housing and Urban Development in Richard Nixon's first term – is a man of decency and integrity. Likability cannot be discounted as an attribute important in a candidate for public office.

"Among all the Republican candidates this year, Romney best taps into what we believe Americans seek – a different look, a fresh vision, a return to America's goodness and greatness."…

To read the full endorsement, please see: http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/