Iraq: "Conditions on the ground" dictate--withdrawal!

BOY, that "Iraqi government wants a withdrawal timetable" story is embarrassing for McCain. Nice break for Obama this week, though; and he could use one.

One reason it's a break is because it will remind most of the voters that there's a couple of wars going on, distract them from that all-important  "Angelina Jolie's twins" story. Another reason it's a break: once again, McCain look like an ass on the subject of continuing the war, which is supposed to be his "big issue," his "area of expertise."

McCain, Obama at odds over Iraqi withdrawal demand
http://news.yahoo.com/...

by Stephen Collinson Tue Jul 8, 6:52 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Iraq's hardening demand for a pullout deadline for US troops on Tuesday sent shockwaves through the White House campaign, putting Republican hopeful John McCain on the defensive...

...Iraq hardened its position on Tuesday, saying it would reject any security pact with Washington unless it set a date for the pullout of US-led foreign soldiers -- a condition turned down by President George W. Bush.

But McCain, who has made staunch support for the US troop "surge" escalation strategy a centerpiece of his campaign, said that recent security gains should not be put at risk by an artificial timetable.

"The Iraqis have made it very clear, including the meetings I had with the president and foreign minister of Iraq, that it is based on conditions on the ground," McCain said in an interview with MSNBC...

Well, the "conditions on the ground," this week, are: the new regime that McCain backs in Iraq is telling the US to get out of Iraq. That, is the condition on the ground.

This puts McCain in a big jam. If he wants to keep talking "no withdrawal," he must argue that the US has "more sovereignty" over Iraq than its own government(!) McCain must argue: "People of Iraq: we, the pro-war hawks of America, know better than your naive, so-called elected government. You have only as much national sovereignty as we installed. We, the American hawks, will decide whether or not we shall continue to occupy your land, and we--not your so-called "government"--will decide when we will leave. And if it's not for another hundred years, that's fine with me! You have no real say in the matter!"

This arrogance makes Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon look as humble as St. Francis of Assisi, by comparison.

But it will be interesting to see McCain continue to insist on "no withdrawal," if the Iraqi government continues to demand withdrawal over the coming months. McCain needs Iraq as a launching platform for an invasion of Iran--a US-founded Iraqi government that insists on remaining "neutral" during a war with Iran would be a horrible embarrassment to McCain and the neo-cons.