8,463
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
==McCain's "doctrine"==
McCain has generally been a hawkish member of [[Congress]]. Matt Welch, an assistant editor at the ''Los Angeles Times'' wrote an op-ed analysis of McCain's foreign affairs philosophy on November 26, 2006:
<blockquote>"McCain has been banging the drum from nearly Day One to put more boots on the ground in Iraq... 'There are a lot of things that we can do to salvage this,' he said on ''Meet the Press'' on Nov. 12, 'but they all require the presence of additional troops.' McCain is more inclined to start wars and increase troop levels than George W. Bush or [[Bill Clinton]]. He has supported every U.S. military intervention of the last two decades, urged both presidents to rattle their sabers louder over [[North Korea]] and [[Iran]], lamented the [[Pentagon]]'s failure to intervene in [[Darfur]] and [[Rwanda]] and supported a general policy of '[[rogue state]] rollback.' He's a fan of Roosevelt's Monroe-Doctrine-on-steroids stick-wielding in [[Latin America]]. And — like Bush — he thinks too much multilateralism can screw up a perfectly good war."
[http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-welch26nov26,0,3481494.story?coll=la-opinion-center] </blockquote>
==McCain's resolution in support of troop buildup==
On Monday, January 14, 2007, Senator McCain's office "released the language of the resolution he is introducing that supports President Bush's troop buildup in Iraq, and also sets 11 benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet. In a statement, Mr. McCain said that [http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/Iraq_Resolution.pdf his resolution], unlike others in circulation (including Republican Senator [[John Warner]]'s compromise proposal), 'avoids sending an inappropriate message to our troops.'" [http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/02/05/war-at-home-mccains-resolution/]
==McCain on why strategy will not succeed==
"In October 2006, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) [http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/27/mccain-escalation-2/ called for 'another 20,000 troops in Iraq.'] In January 2007, President Bush accepted the idea and [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/10/ap/politics/mainD8MIM2500.shtml announced he would send 21,500 more soldiers] into the middle of Iraq’s civil war. McCain quickly [http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6341262,00.html endorsed] the strategy.
"Since that time, McCain has been [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=au2opzCPk3N4&refer=home slowly back-pedaling from the escalation plan], offering numerous reasons for why the strategy will not succeed. He has argued the Pentagon was [http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/16/neocon-pentagon-escalation/ 'dragging its feet'] in implementing the strategy. Now, he is arguing that the escalation is too small," Faiz Shakir [http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/21/mccain-small/ reported] January 21, 2007, for ''Think Progress''.
On NBC's [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16634747/ Meet the Press, January 21, 2007], "McCain said, 'I would have liked to have seen more' troops sent to Iraq. He added, 'If it had been up to me,' more U.S. troops would be on their way into Baghdad."
SW: a little tidying
"The second 'surge' of troops to Iraq is being executed by deploying more combat brigades to the country, plus extending tours of duty for troops already there," Powell wrote. "When additional support troops are included in this second troop 'surge,' the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 – a record high number – by the end of [2007]."
==Kagan/Keane Plan and the Debate on the level and feasibility of the surge==
* Sen. [[Carl Levin]] (D-Mich.), the new [[Senate Armed Services Committee]] chair in 2007, stated in early 2007 that he could support a surge if the Iraqi government first took concrete steps toward a political reconciliation between the country's major factions: "That at least puts pressure on Iraqis... That's what I would call 'hard conditionality,'" Levin said. [http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-usiraq6jan06,0,5690561,full.story?coll=la-home-nation]
==Political implications for Sen. John McCainand the surge==
===A win-win for McCain===
"McCain must be sweating bullets. If Bush decides to add troops, the strategy going forward in Iraq will be known as the McCain Doctrine. The Senator never thought [[George W. Bush|Bush]] would actually go through with it," blogger Nate of ''StopJohnMcCain2008'' wrote December 16, 2006. "For Bush, this presents an excellent opportunity to work on his legacy. Go with war hero John McCain’s plan for Iraq and it suddenly becomes his problem. Bush gets good press for trying something new, and John McCain watches his [[John McCain: U.S. presidential election, 2008|presidential hopes]] go down the drain."
<blockquote>"[McCain] claims that early on he predicted that unless we send in enough troops to win we would lose the war and chaos would ensue. To remain consistent, he continues to say this, but now in the context of also being a 'critic' of past and current policy--'If they had only listened to me then...' But he knows, of course, that there is no way that anyone will agree to assign more soldiers to a hopeless or unpopular cause. So there is not a chance that his recommendation will be accepted, much less be put to the test and fail with blame then assigned to him. Rather, we will either stay the course (he's opposed to that) or, most assuredly, begin some sort of phased withdrawal (he's also opposed to that). Since either scenario inevitably leads to even more chaos, he gets to say, 'I told you so. If we had only had the vision, the perseverance, the guts to do it the right way (my way--with adequate forces) we would have prevailed. So don't tie me to Bush's failed policy. All along I had the winning plan and no one listened.' Perversely brilliant!" [http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/14/112212/51]</blockquote>
===McCain's "doctrine"===
McCain has generally been a hawkish member of [[Congress]]. Matt Welch, an assistant editor at the ''Los Angeles Times'' wrote an op-ed analysis of McCain's foreign affairs philosophy on November 26, 2006:
<blockquote>"McCain has been banging the drum from nearly Day One to put more boots on the ground in Iraq... 'There are a lot of things that we can do to salvage this,' he said on ''Meet the Press'' on Nov. 12, 'but they all require the presence of additional troops.' McCain is more inclined to start wars and increase troop levels than George W. Bush or [[Bill Clinton]]. He has supported every U.S. military intervention of the last two decades, urged both presidents to rattle their sabers louder over [[North Korea]] and [[Iran]], lamented the [[Pentagon]]'s failure to intervene in [[Darfur]] and [[Rwanda]] and supported a general policy of '[[rogue state]] rollback.' He's a fan of Roosevelt's Monroe-Doctrine-on-steroids stick-wielding in [[Latin America]]. And — like Bush — he thinks too much multilateralism can screw up a perfectly good war."
[http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-welch26nov26,0,3481494.story?coll=la-opinion-center] </blockquote>
===McCain's resolution in support of troop buildup===
On Monday, January 14, 2007, Senator McCain's office "released the language of the resolution he is introducing that supports President Bush's troop buildup in Iraq, and also sets 11 benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet. In a statement, Mr. McCain said that [http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/Iraq_Resolution.pdf his resolution], unlike others in circulation (including Republican Senator [[John Warner]]'s compromise proposal), 'avoids sending an inappropriate message to our troops.'" [http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/02/05/war-at-home-mccains-resolution/]
===McCain on why strategy will not succeed===
"In October 2006, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) [http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/27/mccain-escalation-2/ called for 'another 20,000 troops in Iraq.'] In January 2007, President Bush accepted the idea and [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/10/ap/politics/mainD8MIM2500.shtml announced he would send 21,500 more soldiers] into the middle of Iraq’s civil war. McCain quickly [http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6341262,00.html endorsed] the strategy.
"Since that time, McCain has been [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=au2opzCPk3N4&refer=home slowly back-pedaling from the escalation plan], offering numerous reasons for why the strategy will not succeed. He has argued the Pentagon was [http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/16/neocon-pentagon-escalation/ 'dragging its feet'] in implementing the strategy. Now, he is arguing that the escalation is too small," Faiz Shakir [http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/21/mccain-small/ reported] January 21, 2007, for ''Think Progress''.
On NBC's [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16634747/ Meet the Press, January 21, 2007], "McCain said, 'I would have liked to have seen more' troops sent to Iraq. He added, 'If it had been up to me,' more U.S. troops would be on their way into Baghdad."
==Implementation and effects==
