What? McCain Hints His Iraq Plan is Roughly Same as Dems’

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


I’m sorry, I find this completely infuriating. Allow me to block quote heavily from this Slate article.

The moment of self-destruction came in a front-page interview for the Sunday, April 15, New York Times. Talking about the war in Iraq, McCain said, “I have no Plan B”—no alternative to winning.

But then, in the next paragraph, Times reporters Michael Gordon and Adam Nagourney write that he did talk about a Plan B, of sorts, after all:

He said that if the Bush administration’s plan had not produced visible signs of progress by the time a McCain presidency began, he might be forced—if only by the will of public opinion—to end American involvement in Iraq.

“I do believe that history shows us Americans will not continue to support an overseas engagement involving the loss of American lives for an unlimited period unless they see some success,” he said. “And then, when they run out of patience, they will demand that we get out.”

Why is this so jaw-dropping? Keep in mind that, on April 11, McCain had delivered a high-profile speech at the Virginia Military Institute in which he denounced the Democrats’ plan for a troop withdrawal as “reckless”—a game of “small politics” that “gives them an advantage in the next election” while denying “our soldiers the means to prevent an American defeat.”

And yet, here was McCain, a few days later, telling the Times that, if elected president, he’d probably do pretty much the same thing.

I’m willing to concede that perhaps McCain was taken out of context or slipped up verbally. As unlikely as that sounds, how else do you explain McCain — the hawkiest of war hawks in Washington — conceding that his plan is nearly identical to the Democrats? Admittedly he’s not saying that we should start redeploying troops now, as many Democrats are, but he is saying that if the surge doesn’t work — and it’s looking that way — Mr. “No Plan B” might start redeploying troops early in his terms. That’s the Democratic platform. That’s what every Democratic is running on. The Democrats — you know, the people whose patriotism you’re impugning? Hello?

I know McCain is a flip-flopper and a panderer, but this is completely banana balls crazy.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest