“100 Years Of War”
The more time the Democrats spend doing this, the better as far as I’m concerned,
John McCain is scheduled to deliver a major foreign policy speech Wednesday in Los Angeles, one with a heavy Iraq focus, but chances are, Democrats won’t be listening. They’ve already distilled his views into an easy-to-remember formulation: 100 years of war.
It is a reference to an offhand remark made by McCain in January about the possible duration of the U.S. presence in Iraq, a comment that Democrats now portray as the equivalent of the McCain Doctrine.
Though it’s not exactly an accurate representation of McCain’s views, Democratic strategists view the “100 years” remark as the linchpin of an effort to turn McCain’s national security credentials against him by framing the Vietnam War hero as a warmonger who envisions an American presence in Iraq without end.
Both Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama began citing McCain’s remark in Democratic debates not long after he made it, and their campaigns have stepped up the focus in recent weeks.
On a recent conference call with reporters, Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s bulldog operative, mentioned four times in two minutes that John McCain “wants to be in Iraq for 100 years.”
“Instead of offering an exit strategy for Iraq, he’s offering us a 100-year occupation,” said Obama last week, in a speech marking the five-year anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
McCain never actually went so far as to call for a century-long occupation. Rather, in response to a New Hampshire town hall questioner who asked about President Bush’s statement that U.S. troops could be in Iraq for 50 years, McCain interrupted and said, “Make it 100.”
“We’ve been in South Korea … we’ve been in Japan for 60 years,” he continued. “We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, that’s fine with me. I hope that would be fine with you, if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting and equipping and motivating people every single day.”
The very fact that even the left-wing hacks at the Politico feel compelled to mention that the 100 years of war remark is “not exactly an accurate representation of McCain’s views,” tells you how weak the whole line of attack is.
Obviously, we’re not going to be fighting in Iraq for 100 years. Moreover, again OBVIOUSLY, McCain was making reference to the sort of situation we have in Japan, Germany, and South Korea where our troops have hung around long after the fighting was over.
The Democrats, the media, and the American people all know and understand what McCain was driving at and when liberals pretend otherwise, it actually makes them look stupid and incompetent at best and dishonest at worst.
For example, when Barack criticizes McCain, you wonder: does he think we should pull out of South Korea, Japan, and Germany? Does he even know we have troops in those countries in the first place or have his advisers not explained that to him?
Certainly, some people may think that it’s a bad idea to keep troops in Iraqi bases long term. That’s a legitimate position. But, when you don’t even seem to understand that our troops can be in a country long-term without fighting the local population, it really doesn’t speak well of your competence or brainpower.
Hat tip to Granite Grok for the story.