“But That’s Not What He Meant!”

That’s the short version of the right’s response to John McCain’s latest unfelicitous expression of his actual beliefs.

What he said:

… [Today show] co-host Matt Lauer asked about the surge strategy in Iraq: “If it’s working Senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?”

McCain replied: “No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq, Americans are in South Korea, Americans are in Japan, American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine. American casualties and the ability to withdraw; we will be able to withdraw. General [David] Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are.

“But the key to it is that we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way. That way, they will be safe, and serve our country and come home with honor and victory, not in defeat, which is what Senator Obama’s proposal would have done. I’m proud of them. And they’re doing a great job. And we are succeeding and it’s fascinating that Senator Obama still doesn’t realize that.”

What he meant seemed to be saying:

What McCain seemed to be saying is that arbitrarily-decided pullout dates (such as the 16 month “run for the exits” date favored by Obama) are asinine; conditions on the ground should indicate when a withdrawal is feasible, and he thinks he’d have a better idea of when that might possible be the next time General David Petraeus briefs Congress in June.

John Hawkins knows what he said (itals in original):

McCain just did not say that bringing the troops home is “not too important.” What he said was that having an estimate of when the troops can come home is “not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq.”

And besides, we’ve had troops in South Korea and Japan and Germany for decades, too, and they’re not fighting anyone, and they’re not taking any casualties. So why would troops staying in Iraq indefinitely be any different from that? It’s not like there’s any fighting or killing going on in Iraq anymore, after all. It’s not like we could be in Iraq for decades before we even got to the point where conditions were comparable to South Korea or Japan or Germany.

It’s not like there are any substantive differences between South Korea or Germany or Japan, and Iraq.

It’s not like McCain needs to be especially sensitive to the way his words might be perceived because he is running as a pro-Iraq war candidate in a country where the vast majority of voters think the Iraq war was a mistake, can’t be won, and should be ended.

It’s not like Iraqis don’t want U.S. troops in their country for the next 100 years. It’s not like the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people are vehemently opposed to the terms and conditions under which the United States proposes to stay in Iraq indefinitely.

It’s not like John McCain, in that Today interview, meant what he said and said exactly what he meant.

Explore posts in the same categories: Politics