So, we've said we'd leave Iraq whenever they--the Iraqis--asked us to. And now they have. Iraqi PM al-Maliki wants us to get out in a similar fashion to Sen. Obama's proposal of a 16-month of gradual reduction in troops. So, what does the White House say? It's partial to a time horizon as opposed to a timetable for leaving Iraq. (Can you tell the difference? No? That's because there is none.) In other words, the Bush Administration just agreed with al-Maliki and Obama. So, where does that leave Lone Wolf McCain, who, as the Iraqi War's true believer and chief cheerleader, basically got sucker punched? Not sure how to answer, that's how.
"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"-McCain campaign adviser Randy Scheunemann
"The fact is that we and the Iraqis will deal in what is in the national security interests of both countries. And there is no reason to assume that the Iraqis aren't going to act in what they perceive as their national interest. I believe we will enact ours and I believe we will all come home." - John McCain, 7/22/08
Does it say anywhere in there he agrees or disagrees with al-Maliki? Nope. Or with the White House's tepid acceptance of the Prime Minister's recent pronouncements? Uh-uh.
So now, what is the McCain camp going to do? Embark on another wave of never-ending rhetoric? Or own up to the fact that his presidential rival's take on our continued involvement in Iraq is shared by the Iraqi government, which represents a major blow to McCain's claims of national security and foreign relations expertise?
Oh, come on, you know it's the former. Shame on you.