< Back to Front Page Text size +

Obama Iraq policy to stay pat, McCain takes umbrage

Posted by Jason Tuohey July 2, 2008 06:07 PM

While John McCain toured Latin America today, an emissary for his campaign hit Barack Obama on another area of the world -- Iraq.

Representative Eric Cantor (R-Va.) blasted Obama's plans for an Iraq withdrawal today, saying "I don't think there's any question that Barack Obama should change his plan in Iraq. His old plan is the wrong way to go."

"He is now clinging to a very ideological commitment on his part," Cantor added.

Cantor's comments were fueled by a recent interview with Obama national campaign co-chair Claire McCaskill, who said the presumptive Democratic nominee would not alter his Iraq policy during the remainder of the election. Obama has said he will begin troop withdrawals immediately, if elected, and aim to have all combat brigades out of the country within 16 months.

Obama's campaign fired back at Cantor, saying:

"Throughout this campaign, Barack Obama has been clear and consistent in saying that we need to responsibly end the war in Iraq so that we can restore our military strength, finish the fight in Afghanistan and focus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11. Today, eleven months after Barack Obama called for more troops in Afghanistan, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff supported that position while pointing out once again that the war in Iraq is shortchanging our effort in Afghanistan. Instead of questioning Barack Obama's consistent call for a new direction in Iraq and Afghanistan, John McCain should explain why he is offering nothing more than four more years of a failed foreign policy that has asked nothing of the Iraqi government, overstretched our military, failed to finish the job in Afghanistan, and failed to bring Osama bin Laden to justice for over six years."

McCain has been an ardent supporter of the war in Iraq, even saying he would rather lose the election than the war.

12 comments so far...
  1. So, Flip-Flop Obama now says we must "finish the fight in Afghanistan" and "send in more troops". And what is his definition of "finished"? Are we to stay there for 100 years if necessary???

    What exactly is Obama's stance on Iraq? Does anyone know? Does Obama know???

    Posted by Old enough to serve, old enough to vote but not old enough to drink July 2, 08 06:35 PM
  1. Flip-Flop? Obama's been saying exactly the same thing since the beginning of his campaign, that one of the biggest problems with the Iraq war is that not only is it pointless but it has also distracted us from the real front, which is Afghanistan/Pakistan, and always has been.

    Also known as common sense.

    Posted by SJB July 3, 08 12:00 PM
  1. Mccain Mcwar flip-flop on energy,Gi bill,immigration,campaign financing etc.....
    the man is too old ...No country for old men....I wish he should stop claiming
    that he is entitled to be President because he was a POW.

    Obama 08

    Posted by War without end...BOMB BOMB BOMB for 100years July 3, 08 01:09 PM
  1. #1,

    Obama wants to pull out of Iraq and not Afghanistan just as he has always proposed. He is not flip-flopping since he has not changed positions.

    "What exactly is Obama's stance on Iraq? Does anyone know? Does Obama know???"

    His stance on Iraq is the same as it has been since we attacked in 2003: he wants our troops out of Iraq. He would leave some troops to man bases that we've established/are establishing there.

    Posted by wicked_grey July 3, 08 01:12 PM
  1. Obama doesn't believe in the Iraq war. We shouldn't have been there in the first place. It was supposed to be Afghanistan and with the declining state of our academics, most Americans didn't even know Iraq from Afghanistan to know what's happening. For all these years, Bush pulled the wool over our eyes. At least Obama knows which countries are in what continent. He's more knowledgeable despite the so-called "lack of experience." To me he has more the necessary experience one needs to deal with life in the global world than any other candidate. This isn't a Hollywood movie. Bombing people for no reason is no way to solve a problem. There's nothing glorious about war. Obama is right to pull out, but we can't just pull out abruptly. We need to fix all we've destroyed. WHYOBAMA08.ORG

    Posted by Aiken Blue July 3, 08 01:32 PM
  1. I ask my American friends who in this country wants this guy in charge and WHY?

    Posted by Mark E July 3, 08 03:17 PM
  1. Sen. Obama, with the best intentions in the world, will come to office with a depleted fighting force and 58 military bases in Iraq. Count them--58--as called for in the Bush/Petraeus plan. Obama will have responsibility for staffing the largest American embassy in the world in Baghdad, that requires 1000 employees. The Bush/Cheney source of Conservative true believers has dried up and the embassy has not been staffed. How Pres. Obama will ever be able to turn this ship of state and back out of Iraq is a mystery. He will need all the wiggle-room that citizens can find in their hearts. So, stop saying flip-flop; this ain't playing hackeysack. People, wish the man good luck because he doesn't have a rich Daddy, a ranch in Texas (no cattle), and a hundred Texas oil billionaires to keep him greased.

    Posted by Margaret in Tulsa July 3, 08 04:25 PM
  1. Everyone with half a brain knows that these unnecessary wars are anathema to the welfare of our whole country. All the important things, especially medical & educational, go begging for lack of funds while the unimaginable expense of the war continues. Not to mention the moral aspect. I'm hanging on by my fingernails to Obama because he's all that's left to us. If he's no better than the Republicans, I'll give up and fall down to a write-in candidate who is truly anti-war. I can't with conscience support a president who won't stop the war as soon as possible, the heck with the excuses.

    Posted by Elaine Corum July 3, 08 04:51 PM
  1. Who knows what Oboma really believes?It is very difficult to believe anyone who has been brain washed with over 10 years of Reverand Wright's anti american views. His current mentor George Soros alias Mr. Money Bags has taken on Barach as his star pupil and as his weapon to save our country from our religious
    traditions and constitutional rights including the right to bear arms.Slowly but surely Barach is introducing himself to the American citizenry.If elected it maybe too late to recover from the implemented ideas of the Reverand and George.

    Posted by John A. in San Diego July 3, 08 08:11 PM
  1. Looks like Obama took McCain's advice today....he said he'd see what happens on his trip to Iraq and "refine his policies"....meanwhile his website still says he'll keep his 16 month promise. So which is it?

    If I voted for Obama because of his Iraq policy I'd feel betrayed right now. Anybody heard of bait and switch?

    Where's Hillary when we need her? At least she was honest. How ironic, the woman who stuck with an unpopular policy got branded as dishonest and got beaten by a guy who was going to bring change, but instead is adopting the same policy as her!

    Posted by Frank from Boston July 3, 08 09:45 PM
  1. Iraq is about over anyway. The US cannot afford to have gas at $7 dollars a gallon and a continually shifting economy. Occupations consume a lot of energy and deplete the economy of cash. That's why the Roman's looted every country they occupied. Since they can't sell bonds on Iraq, not enough of the public supports the occupation, and raising taxes is a political office killer. There is no way to continue paying for it. Obama is telling us the actual plan and McCain is lying to get into office. If McCain gets into office, that will be his job, to lie to us until the troops are forced home by bankruptcy.

    Posted by Emilio Largo July 4, 08 08:52 PM
  1. Obama has clearly softened his tone on his position in Iraq. He is moving to the center for the general election - that's what *politicians* do.

    I think his current position is more reasonable. He had said previously, that *regardless of conditions on the ground" he would begin lowering troops levels immediately. He said this in a debate, and the moderator asked him if he really meant that - and he repeated it. That was a ridiculous statement to make and he was after the very liberal anti-war/Iraq vote - which he got to defeat Hillary. Now he has to change that stance to attract voters in the center.

    All politicians flip flop to varying degrees. But Obama has set himself up for criticism by all his soaring rhetoric about being a different kind of politician, above politics as usual, the deliverer of change.

    So, there you go Obama supporters: there will undoubtedly be more "change" coming your way in this election and when/if he takes office.

    Posted by tony July 5, 08 09:24 AM
add your comment
Required
Required (will not be published)

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

About political intelligence Field reports from Boston Globe reporters and editors covering the 2008 presidential campaign and the national maneuvering of Bay State politicians.

Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com

archives

browse this blog

by category