George W. Bush has a new problem in Iraq. Since taking us into that war on claims that turned out to be 100% false, it's been one series of blunders after another. Unlike all the other problems, this new issue wasn't actually created by George W. Bush, but was created by his lack of comprehension about the mess he created.

On Monday, July 8, 2008 Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demanded a US troop withdrawal timetable. In a story published on July 7th by Reuters…

"Today, we are looking at the necessity of terminating the foreign presence on Iraqi lands and restoring full sovereignty," Maliki told Arab ambassadors in blunt remarks during an official visit to Abu Dhabi, capital of the United Arab Emirates.

"One of the two basic topics is either to have a memorandum of understanding for the departure of forces or a memorandum of understanding to set a timetable for the presence of the forces, so that we know (their presence) will end in a specific time."

"U.S. officials in Baghdad had no immediate comment. Last month Maliki caught Washington off guard when he said talks on the security deal were at a "dead end" after he complained Iraq's sovereignty was being infringed by U.S. demands."

"This means the phenomena of unilateral detention will be over, as well as unilateral operations and immunity," he said.

The Associated Press had a follow-up story published July 8th on the subject…

"Our stance in the negotiations under way with the American side will be strong," said Iraq's national security adviser, Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, a day after the country's prime minister first publicly said he expects some type of timeline.

"We will not accept any memorandum of understanding that doesn't have specific dates to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq," al-Rubaie told reporters.

President Bush has said he opposes a timeline. The White House said Monday it did not believe Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was proposing a rigid timeline for U.S. troop withdrawals.

Bush's response is quite remarkable, in denying the intent of the clear and explicit statements of position from the Iraq Prime Minister and his National Security Adviser. Only a month earlier on June 9, 2008 this story was carried nationwide…

U.S. Seeking 58 Bases In Iraq / By Lelia Fadel / McClatchy Newspapers:

Baghdad Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases a part of a proposed "status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.

"The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation," said Jalal al Din al Saghir, a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. "We were occupied by order of the Security Council," he said, referring to the 2004 Resolution mandating a U.S. military occupation in Iraq at the head of an international coalition. "But now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far."

Other conditions sought by the United States include control over Iraqi air space up to 30,000 feet and immunity from prosecution for U.S. troops and private military contractors. The agreement would run indefinitely but be subject to cancellation with two years notice from either side, lawmakers said.

"It would impair Iraqi sovereignty," said Ali al Adeeb a leading member of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa party of the proposed accord. "The Americans insist so far that it is they who define what is an aggression on Iraq and what is democracy inside Iraq... if we come under aggression we should define it and ask for help."

"Is there sovereignty for Iraq - or isn't there? If it is left to them, they would ask for immunity even for the American dogs," Saghir said.

It would appear the lines in the sand have been drawn. The Iraqi government wants our troops to leave, and they want a timetable for the withdrawal. George W. Bush wants to build 58 permanent bases in Iraq for a permanent occupation, which the Iraqi government is adamantly opposed to.

This latest conflict also has serious political implications. On June 11, 2008 John McCain appeared on NBC's "The Today Show" and was asked by Matt Lauer if he had an estimate of when troops would start returning home. John McCain replied, "No, but that's not too important." Previously McCain had indicated he advocates keeping our troops in Iraq for 100+ years. That's not a position the Iraqi government supports, and in fact is on the record as opposing.

While George W. Bush's credibility on Iraq is totally exhausted, McCain would like to project that he has superior knowledge of the events in Iraq over his presidential opponent. Now John McCain is faced with the unpleasant prospect of having to flip-flop again on his opinions and claims or continue to push his previously stated positions and claims that are not only contrary to the views of the American people, but the democratically elected government in Iraq as well.

John McCain, by keeping his presidential hopes tied to his unwavering support of George W. Bush, has once again boxed himself into a corner. He can stand firm and be unwavering in his position, which is opposed by the majority of Americans and the Iraqi government, or he can once again flip-flop. That's not where he'd like to be, but he can only blame himself for the newest campaign strategy blunder.

John McCain is giving us an advanced look at what kind of judgment he would bring to the office he's seeking. It's not very encouraging.

Its like a tennis match, Obama flipiity flops, then McCain does, then Obama ... then McCain!

__________________
Not many people know this, but I'm really famous!

Hardly, McCain has placed his campaign on the war in Iraq and his total committment to George W. Bush's policies. Now even the Iraqi goverment wants us out, and they want a specific date. McCain will have to flip-flop on his 100+ years. Bush won't get all his military bases. McCain will once again illustrate how little he actually knows about the situation in Iraq.

He did it to himself by being a blind little sheep following the policies of the worst president in America's history.

That kool aid is rotting your brain!

Obama has flippity flopped on:

Warrantless wiretapping

The Iraq troop withdrawal

Public campaign financing

and the list goes on.

Ironically those are the issues that the wackos in the Democratic Party want him to fight Bush the most on!

__________________
Not many people know this, but I'm really famous!

Dream on. McCain is a tired, old man with a bad comb-over that has now had the cornerstone to his campagn jerked away.

Here are some more of his wrong and bonehead claims about Iraq...

During a recent appearance in Columbus, Ohio, John McCain made the claim he "believes the Iraq war can be won within four years." That simple claim creates the necessity to explore multiple issues, and there are obvious factual observations to explore.

In making that statement, John McCain supported his claim with no facts. He didn't indicate there was even one member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that agreed with his claim. He made no indication that he'd arrived at that assessment after consulting with any military leadership. He failed to provide any details indicating the Iraqi government supports his latest claim. But most importantly, he offered no plan on how he would accomplish his latest claim. He simply made his claim, hoping it sounds good enough on the surface that he won't have to flesh it out with pesky details.

If his latest claim actually turned out to be accurate, then that would mean the greatest military force the world has ever seen would have spent ten years at war with a small country with little military muscle. That's seven years longer than it took to win WW II and it was fought against two major military powers on multiple fronts around the planet, in the air, on the ground, and at sea.

John McCain also omitted any discussion about the costs of continuing this needless war for four more years. It's unlikely that this war will cost less to wage, but assuming it doesn't exceed the current spending levels that would mean John McCain is willing to dump another $624 billion into this quagmire. That's money that won't get spent on America's needs at home, instead he's more than willing, and eager to channel it into a four year continuance of a needless war. The shameful side of his claim also wasn't discussed by McCain. He didn't mention his willingness to allow more American's to die for George W. Bush's mistake. That was left unsaid.

John McCain just issued a claim. No plan accompanied his claim. No facts were offered to support his claim. He just made his claim and hoped that would be enough.

But John McCain has another problem with his latest claim. He's made claims before. He's made lots of claims about Iraq that are verifiable, and were public. He has a problem with his latest claim, and that issue is the fact that John McCain has no credibility left in discussing Iraq. You'd have to look long and hard to find any individuals with less credibility on the Iraq war than George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and John McCain. The problem with McCain's latest claim is his record on previous claims about Iraq. He would like to project the image that he has superior knowledge about this needless war and it's a cornerstone of his presidential campaign.

John McCain has a problem. He has a record on Iraq. He has a record he can be, and should be judged by.

John McCain has repeatedly confused Sunni and (*)(*)(*)(*)e religious sects, revealing a stunning ignorance for a senator who claims to be the sole possessor of superior knowledge and judgment regarding U.S. involvement in Iraq. Frankly, McCain has an astonishing record of inaccurate assessments and poor predictions about Bush’s needless war in Iraq. From his nonsensical assessment of the security of Baghdad to his assertions of political progress in Iraq, which even the top U.S. commander in that country contradicts, McCain has a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing history of being wrong on Iraq.

McCain said the war in Iraq would be “One of the best things that’s happened to America.” While appearing on NBC’s Meet The Press, McCain said, “We’re going to be all right. We’re going to prevail and we will win and it’ll be one of the best things that’s happened to America and the world in a long time ‘cause it’ll reverberate throughout the Middle East.” (March 3, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and no “reverberation”, this is “one of the best things that have happened to America”?

McCain predicted “Great Joy and Pleasure in Iraq”. While appearing on NBC’s Meet The Press, McCain said, “I believe that these people have the same yearnings for freedom and democracy and independence and self-determination that every person on earth does, and once this Gestapo is off of their backs, then I think you will see great joy and pleasure that we were able to free them and that will not come until they are sure that they don’t have Saddam Hussein returning again.” (March 30, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and where’s the “great joy and pleasure” in Iraq” Instead, we’re battling insurgents, that’s Iraqi citizens, that seem to be annoyed with an invasion and prospect of a 100+ year occupation.

McCain said Bush led with “clarity and did not exaggerate the case for war”. In 2003, McCain praised George W. Bush’s leadership on the Iraq war saying, “I think the president has led with great clarity and I think he’s done a great job leading the country, don’t you all?” And asked if he thought the president exaggerated the case for war, McCain said, “I don’t think so.” (MsNBC Hardball, April 4, 2003 / Fox News July 31, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, no weapons of mass destruction in 200 known sites, no nuclear threat, no clear and present danger to America, in fact 100% of Bush’s claims used as sole justification for starting his needless war turned out to 100% false, and McCain says “no exaggeration”.

McCain said that disarming Iraq would, “Significantly Improve the Stability of The Region.” In a 2003 New York Times op-ed, McCain wrote, “Many critics suggest that disarming Iraq through regime change would not result in an improved peace. There are risks in this endeavor, to be sure. But no one can plausible argue that ridding the world of Saddam Hussein will not significantly improve the stability of the region and the security of American interests and values. (March 13, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, and no “stability in the region”. We don’t even have “stability in Iraq”. We don’t even have “stability” in Baghdad. We don’t even have “stability” in the Green Zone. Then there’s the issue of Bush’s needless war enhancing Iran’s influence in the region to a point where the Republicans are contemplating starting yet another war they can lose.

McCain predicted “Jubilant Iraqis Would Diminish Anti-American Sentiment in The Middle East.” In the build up to the Iraq war, McCain stated that it is “more likely that antipathy toward the United States in the Islamic world might diminish amid the demonstrations of jubilant Iraqis celebrating the end of a regime that has fee equals in its ruthlessness. (American Conservative Magazine, February 11, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and no “jubilant Iraqis” The reality is, Bush’s blunder in strategy allowed a civil war to erupt. The fact is, anti-American sentiment in the Middle East has swelled the ranks of al-Qaeda as a great recruiting tool. The fact is, all of our own intelligence agencies are on the record in stating the Iraq war has made America less safe. In the face of this evidence, McCain wants to continue this mistake for 100+ years.

Repeatedly, McCain Claimed The United States Would Win Easily in Iraq. In 2002 and 2003, before the invasion, McCain repeatedly claimed success in Iraq would be easy and minimized potential risks. According to CNN, McCain stated, “Because I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women.” (March 17, 2003)

Five years later, 4,100+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, a civil war in progress, tens of thousands more troops and this is “easy”? It was “easier” and faster to defeat the Germans and Japanese in WW II than to just create order in Iraq. It was so “easy” McCain now thinks we should still be working on it for 100+ years.

When it comes to Iraq, a cornerstone to his bid to become president, John McCain has a record we can view and judge him by. He’s been consistent. He’s been consistently wrong. He’s been wrong, dead wrong. He was wrong then. He’s wrong now. His claims are not subject to spin. They’re documented and reveal the danger of allowing anyone so consistently wrong the opportunity to make the mess he helped create, get worse.

When it comes to credibility, John McCain is bankrupt. He’s spent and squandered any credibility he once had in his blind allegiance to George W. Bush. There is zero reason to accept any of his assessments, including his latest one, as having any basis in fact or truth. Obviously that won’t stop him from making more claims, but his own record of previous inaccurate claims should disqualify any credibility from being attached to them.

John McCain, who has been consistently wrong, is wrong for America. His own well established record proves that beyond any doubt.