Iraq asking for timetable for withdrawal,possible political ploy by the GOP,so McCain can flip-flop?

[Levgreee]

I strongly think that the Iraqi government would be complicit in doing much of what the GOP asked. I also think that the Iraq war, staying the course versus withdrawing, could be the issue which decides the election.

The Iraqis asking for a timetable for withdrawal would give the GOP a valid excuse to set their own timeline(although probably longer), without seeming like they are conceding the point to the Democrats.
By making people think there was going to be an end to the war within sight, even if it was 2-3 years instead of 16 months, the GOP would assauge some of the "100 year war" fears.

What do you think? Would they ever make this announcement before passing it through Bush first?

[EV_Ares]

1. I think it shows Barack is on target as usual. They are telling us to either

have a timetable for withdrawal or to leave now.

Yeah, McCain will have to flip-flop from his present view.

[Levgreee]

3. But you see, it can be spun as not as much as a flip-flop... that we stayed in Iraq until the time

was right, and the Iraqis wanted to leave, instead of leaving in retreat. The GOP has not been dead-set on staying, but only staying until the job was done.

It is a better political rationalization for withdrawal, for the GOP.



What is more costly for the Repubs?

1.McCain paying the cost for flip-flopping, but people being able to elect the Republicans without worrying about staying in Iraq.

2. Staying with the separate position, Republicans for staying in Iraq, Democrats for leaving. They might want to eliminate the difference.
It's not like McCain hasn't already been getting away with flip-flops.



They are changing from 2., which could single-handedly cost them the election, to 1., which just hurts them. It's the lesser of two evils.

[EV_Ares]

7. Don't see how McCain can spin it. The Iraqi people want us out, voters here

want us out. The Iraqis say give us a timetable for when you are going to leave, if not, leave now.

The republicans saying "until the job is done". OK, tell me what that means.

Barack voted against the war from the beginning. Has always been for a timetable for getting out or withdrawing the troops.

McCain says 100 years maybe. Never has been for a timetable.

Barack is and always has been right on this. Now, he is proven right.

[Bullet1987]

2. I don't agree with the OP...entirely

If McCain sets a timetable, it goes against everything he's ever said about Iraq and would be a HUGE flip-flop.

[EV_Ares]

8. Absolutely, how can he now say he is for a timetable with his hardness always for

this war.

They tried hard to say Barack flip-flopped by just using the word "refinement" of which I think that fell on death ears as far as the public was concerned. It did not hold water. This puts Barack in the drivers seat on this.

[karynnj]

4. I'm suspicious because the media has completely forgotten that he wanted

a timeline in 2006 as well - around the time of Kerry/Feingold. It was in fact one reason Kerry and Feingold mentioned for why we needed to leave. I suspect they want to sell this as the "product" of the surge and start pulling out before the election -even if they don't intend to continue it - to make people buy McCain's line that teh surge was his idea and it worked.

[EV_Ares]

9. McCain has never wanted a timetable.Always said one would help the terrorists as this Wash Post

article indicates:

On the Issues
McCain Responds to Maliki's Call for an Iraq Withdrawal Timetable
By Michael D. Shear
Sen. John McCain, who has repeatedly derided anyone who advocated a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, now suddenly finds himself in a political box as the American-backed Iraqi leadership yesterday raised the prospect of exactly that.

For the first time on Monday, Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki said in a statement from his office that the two countries should consider deciding the future of American troops with "a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal."

McCain was silent on the comments Monday. But today, his top foreign policy adviser declined to criticize Maliki or distance McCain from him. And they sought to portray Maliki's comments as consistent with the Republican nominee's long-standing position.

"Senator McCain has always said that conditions on the ground -- including the security threats posed by extremists and terrorists, and the ability of Iraqi forces to meet those threats -- would be key determinants in U.S. force levels," said adviser Randy Scheunemann, who criticized Sen. Barack Obama's "constantly shifting positions" on Iraq.

But McCain's position on the question of a specific timetable for withdrawal has been shifting as the candidate moved from the Republican primary into the general election.

In speeches, town hall meetings, interviews and campaign commercials, McCain has said a timetable would provide terrorists the knowledge of how long they have to wait until American troops are gone. He has repeatedly said that setting a date for withdrawal would lead to "chaos, genocide and we will be back with greater sacrifice."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/07/08/mccain_responds_to_malikis_cal.html

[cliss]

5. Hard to tell.

If I were an Iraqi government official, this is what I would be seeing right now:

1) Bush administration is dying and gasping for air. The American public has HAD it with these fools. Their days are numbered, and so are the hard-ball negotiations they're trying to force on the Iraqis.

2) Chances are very good that there will be a new administration in the fall. An Obama administration. Meaning = a better deal which can be negotiated.

3) If I were an Iraqi, I'd ~~wait~~. Stall, hesitate, stall for time, ask Bush to wait a while...don't sign anything.

4) Go Public. Make demands...in foreign countries. It seems that Al Maliki is rather quiet when he's in Baghdad. But when he makes trips to other countries, he becomes quite vocal about his demands and he should.

[EV_Ares]

10. U have pegged this one I think. More rats abandoning the ship, eom.

[grantcart]

6. The announcement comes from their parliment and has not been "passed" through Bush

This is, in fact, not news. Whenever there has been a news leak that Bush and Maliki are negotiating a base agreement the different parties in the Iraqi Parliment consistently have said that they want a timetable to phase out American troops and no permanent bases.

Bush has been in denial about this and the parties in the Parliment have been absoluely insistent. Maliki is "leaking" this again so that the Administration will finally get the word that there has to be a planned withdrawal of all combat troops.

[Johonny]

12. I agree

This isn't the first time they've asked for this.

[moondust]

11. They may be simply trying to help Obama.

They may see it as an opening that will allow them to finally get rid of the incompetent, greedy bastards that have cost their country so dearly.