header_blog.jpg

McCain Was Against RNC Defense of "100 Years" Comment Before He Was For It

Posted by Matt Ortega on April 29, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Reeling from the damage of John McCain's own words that he'd be "fine" keeping U.S. forces in Iraq for "100 years," the RNC and John McCain's campaign are arguing that McCain meant a long-term commitment modeled after the American presence in German, Japan and Korea. But much to the RNC's chagrin, even John McCain himself said that such a model wouldn't work in Iraq.

John McCain on Hardball with Chris Matthews in 2005:

Host Chris Matthews pressed McCain on the issue. "You've heard the ideological argument to keep U.S. forces in the Middle East. I've heard it from the hawks. They say, keep United States military presence in the Middle East, like we have with the 7th Fleet in Asia. We have the German...the South Korean component. Do you think we could get along without it?"

McCain balked:

"I not only think we could get along without it, but I think one of our big problems has been the fact that many Iraqis resent American military presence," he responded. "And I don't pretend to know exactly Iraqi public opinion. But as soon as we can reduce our visibility as much as possible, the better I think it is going to be."

Last November, John McCain told Charlie Rose that he didn't think a long-term, South Korea-style American presence was possible because of the "nature of [Iraqi] society and the religious aspects of it," even if there are no casualties.

There are only two explanations for this and neither of them make John McCain look very good:

John McCain flip-flopped on the notion of a long-term American presence in Iraq to appease the far right, or more dangerously, is claiming support for a policy he knows will never work to cover up for his own comments that he would be fine keeping U.S. forces in Iraq for "100 years."

Comments - 5 »

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment.
(sign out - change name - manage account)