Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front: Politix

McCain says Americans will be in Iraq for a long time

2007-02-21

Republican presidential hopeful John McCain said Tuesday that American forces are in for a long, difficult stay in Iraq and likened it to the United States' decades-long presence in South Korea. "I think we're there for a long, long time," McCain told reporters during a stop at the Georgia Capitol. "We've been in South Korea for a long, long time also."

The comments came a day after McCain blasted former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for mismanaging the war in Iraq. McCain said Monday that Rumsfeld would be remembered as one of the worst defense chiefs in the nation's history.

I don't agree, though he wasn't perfect. Nor do I think McCain will go down in history as this generation's Daniel Webster.

Asked if his criticism extended to President Bush for keeping Rumsfeld around as long as he did, McCain ~~waffled~~ said there was plenty of blame to go around. "I am being critical of everybody including all of us who are responsible for mistakes that we've made in the war," the Arizona senator said. "Including myself. I have said many times that I am critical, but the president has the right to choose his team."

Posted by:Fred

#16 A blinding flash of the obvious, that leaves little phueching doubt among thinking men.

Seem that most of the guys that have been bitching about Rumsfeld have been Army. I guess that's what a thousand rice-bowls breaking sounds like...

Posted by: Pappy 2007-02-21 20:46

#15 I sincerely hope so too, Redneck Jim. I would love to see that. But McCain just doesn't get it. He might know how to talk tough about Iraq but it was asinine to say those things about Rumsfeld unless you're Barack Osama trying to win the looney bin wing of the donk party. It makes him sound like he has a loose cannon rolling around on his deck. Then there's the border and guys like McCain are running away from it. I can't get over that. We're gonna be overrun by illegals just like France. What good does it do to win Iraq if we lose the U.S.? Looking back even further, it pissed me off when he endorsed Clinton's intervention in Kosovo. Serbia ended up losing that province to the barbarians and nobody stops to question if they'll stop with just Kosovo? Of course they won't. It was McCain's job to know better and he didn't.

Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-02-21 15:53

#14 I hope Hillary gets around one thousand votes total, tucks her tail between her legs and vanishes whimpering into the night.

Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-02-21 12:49

#13 So exPlane (#10)... tell us what you really think. Seriously, he always seemed like a first-class a-hole to me. I've enjoyed recently watching McCain come to the painful realization that the press doesn't really love him. Plus, that annoying Lindsey is always up his a$$. All that said, he's said some great things lately about the war, most notably telling a reporter, "Look. It's a lot better to have an extended, tired militarty rather than a defeated one. I know." [paraphrased] It was as if he punched the reporter in the face.

Posted by: Captain Lewis 2007-02-21 12:22

#12 Re my comments on the Blair item, above, what's really interesting here is McCain's statement that we'll be in Iraq for a long time.

A much more elaborate version of this, explaining why it is needed and worthwhile, is what we've needed from the administration for years now. Instead, we've had this bizarre "uh, gee, let's see, that's right, we're almost at the point where we're going to bring some troops home, uh, yeah, that's it, we're looking to reduce our footprint by summer" etc.

So while I think McCain's rather unsuited to any executive position, much less C-in-C, here he states a critical truth.

Posted by: Verlaine 2007-02-21 12:08

#11 If McCain wins the nomination then Hillary wins the election. Can't we get a real Republican, please?

Posted by: treo 2007-02-21 10:52

#10 McCain: He was a dick at VA174, and he is a dick now. A grandstanding, feather merchant asshole. Yes, I know, he was POW for all those years. So what, lot's of other, and better men, were too.

He was dick before he was shot down, he was dick after he was released and he is a dick now.

Moral: Once a dick, always a dick!

Posted by: exPlane Captain VA174 2007-02-21 09:20

#9 Well, lessee. We got
Dick "troops don't need support weapons" Aspin
Louis "sell your company or lose contracts" Johnson
Robert "take a whiz kids" McNamara
James "they're coming to take me away" Forrestal

Rumsfeld is looking better and better.

Posted by: Jackal 2007-02-21 09:18

#8 And if you could not have born the burden yourself then it would be wise to remain silent concerning those who did.

I call semi-bullshit. What you say there - to a large degree - makes perfect sense. However, none of us could ever win a conressional election in San Francisco, but we should still be allowed to critiques those that have.

Posted by: Mike N. 2007-02-21 09:00

#7 Rumsfeld was a fine SecDef, one of the best we've ever had. In years to come the historians will remember him approvingly--as they generally will GWB.

Posted by: mac 2007-02-21 08:17

#6 Hey, I was in the military at a time when the older NCOs and officers remembered him very well... usually with deep and abiding contempt. I have read that the senior officers who had to deal with him and his minions despised him with a passion. I've never picked up on that degree of universal loathing from the active duty types as regards Rummy.

Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2007-02-21 07:57

#5 Sgt. Mom:

Here here! MacNamera and his 100,000 indeed, another bumbling idiot. Sorry, no thanks to you for the recollection young lady.

Posted by: Besoeker 2007-02-21 07:36

#4 "Rumsfeld would be remembered as one of the worst defense chiefs in the nation's history"

Not while people can still call Robert MacNamera to mind!

Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2007-02-21 07:30

#3 It is easy to criticize those who are superior to ourselves. It is satisfying on several psychological levels.

McCain is a Presidential Candidate, he no longer enjoys the luxury of being quite as frank and specific in his comments as a private citizen might enjoy.

And Rumsfeld was a giant, of will and ability and " heart " as Argent says. BOTH McCain and Rumsfeld are very brave men. Each of us would be indeed fortunate to have men such as these as kin.

Allow History to judge them and avoid personal opinions. History will do so in any event and our opinions are largely irrelevant anyway. Both these men DESERVE respect. We may no agree with them, we may not even like them, but they literally ARE history and embody it in their character and being. Time has and does move to their heartbeats.

Each man who judges another puts himself under the same lense. As you judge you will be held to that judgement. For the sake of survival judge only when it is truly necessary to do so. And if you could not have born the burden yourself then it would be wise to remain silent concerning those who did.

Posted by: Angleton 9 2007-02-21 06:33

#2 I'll always remember Rumsfeld during 9/11 helping others to get out of the Pentagon and how he kicked ass in Afghanistan. As for Iraq, we kicked serious ass and lost relatively low amount of troops considering the threat. Bad intelligence and a media propoganda war was his downfall. He had heart.

Posted by: Angenter Crolugum3645 2007-02-21 01:23

#1 McCain said Monday that Rumsfeld would be remembered as one of the worst defense chiefs in the nation's history.

A blinding flash of the obvious, that leaves little phueching doubt among thinking men.

Posted by: Besoeker 2007-02-21 01:16

00:00