Ignoring McCain's "greeted as liberators" assurance, Wash. Post editorial credited him with prewar "foresight"
SUMMARY: A Washington Post editorial praised Sen. John McCain's "foresight and consistency about how the [Iraq] war should have been waged"; however, in the days immediately before and after the invasion, McCain echoed Bush administration statements that U.S. forces would be greeted as "liberators." Since then, McCain has made apparently contradictory statements on the administration's management of the Iraq war.
An April 29 Washington Post editorial titled "Reality Show" praised Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for his "foresight and consistency about how the [Iraq] war should have been waged." The editorial singled out his statements during his April 25 speech officially announcing his presidential candidacy that the Iraq war "has not gone well" and that the United States "did not meet [its] responsibility initially" to plan and conduct the war properly, asserting that McCain "has been making these points since before the invasion." In fact, as Media Matters for America has noted, in the days immediately preceding and following the invasion McCain affirmed Bush administration statements that U.S. forces would be greeted as "liberators."
Moreover, while McCain has criticized the planning for and conduct of the war, at other times, he issued rosy predictions about the war and praised the Bush administration's conduct of the war.
From the Post editorial, subtitled "Sen. McCain injects some useful truths into the presidential campaign":
He [McCain] did not shrink from the [Iraq war] issue in his announcement, admitting the war "has not gone well" and referring to it in appropriately cautionary terms. "America should never undertake a war unless we are prepared to do everything necessary to succeed, unless we have a realistic and comprehensive plan for success, and unless all relevant agencies of government are committed to that success," he said. "We did not meet this responsibility initially. And we must never repeat that mistake again."
Mr. McCain did not say so, but he has been making these points since well before the invasion. Whatever your position on the war, then or now, Mr. McCain deserves credit for foresight and consistency about how the war should have been waged. And he was, properly, unflinching about the terrorist challenge facing the country he hopes to lead: "a global struggle with violent extremists who despise us, our values and modernity itself."
Notwithstanding the Post's assertion that McCain "has been making these points since before the invasion," before the war, McCain echoed Vice President Dick Cheney's well-known prewar prediction about the success of the mission in Iraq:
- On the March 12, 2003, edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews asked McCain: "Do you believe that the people of Iraq or at least a large number of them will treat us as liberators?" McCain answered: "Absolutely. Absolutely."
Immediately after the invasion, McCain again echoed Cheney's optimism:
- On the March 24, 2003, edition of Hardball -- several days after the U.S.-led coalition had invaded Iraq -- McCain said: "[T]here's no doubt in my mind that we will prevail and there's no doubt in my mind, once these people are gone, that we will be welcomed as liberators."
Similarly, the Post's editorial page also adopted the "liberators" language in the aftermath of the invasion, writing on March 23, 2003:
For all the initial success, the bitter political and diplomatic divides the war has opened show no sign of closing. There have been angry and occasionally violent demonstrations against the war across the Middle East, in the United States and in many other parts of the world. Hostile media have seized on the footage of Baghdad to claim falsely that Iraq is being devastated. Relations between Turkey and the United States teeter at the brink of crisis over the potential entry of Turkish troops into northern Iraq. France and Russia meanwhile persist in their efforts to build an anti-American bloc in and outside the United Nations. French President Jacques Chirac threatens to obstruct a U.N. resolution on a postwar regime unless France is allowed to dictate terms to those who now do the fighting. The obstructionist diplomats, and many of the antiwar demonstrators, closed their eyes to the threat of Saddam Hussein and the terror of his regime. They ought now look at Iraqis who are greeting the Marines as liberators.
Moreover, contrary to the Post's claim that McCain "deserves credit for foresight and consistency," he has been far from consistent in his statements regarding the Bush administration's prosecution of the war and the candor with which the administration has presented the situation in Iraq to the American public. Indeed, his own optimistic predictions in March 2003 did not prevent McCain from subsequently criticizing the Bush administration for its excessively optimistic predictions and assessments about the situation in Iraq. During an August 22, 2006, appearance at a campaign event for Republican Mike DeWine, who lost his Ohio Senate seat to Democrat Sherrod Brown, McCain specifically criticized Bush administration statements about the war: "stuff happens," "Mission Accomplished," "last throes," and "pockets of dead-enders," saying those comments "grieve[d]" him.
However, as Media Matters noted, three days after criticizing these comments, McCain issued a press release backing away from this criticism, praising Bush for his "honest" public statements regarding the war.
McCain's inconsistency on "Mission Accomplished" is nothing new. After Bush appeared before the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the USS Abraham Lincoln, McCain initially claimed the phrase was accurate. On the June 11, 2003, edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, while discussing the timing of a Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing to hear testimony from Gen. Tommy Franks, McCain said that while "reconstruction of Iraq would be a long, long, difficult process," "the major conflict is over, the regime change has been accomplished."
NEIL CAVUTO (host): Senator -- after a conflict means after the conflict, and many argue the conflict isn't over.
McCAIN: Well, then why was there a banner that said mission accomplished on the aircraft carrier?
Look, the -- I have said a long time that reconstruction of Iraq would be a long, long, difficult process, but the conflict -- the major conflict is over, the regime change has been accomplished, and it's very appropriate. In two weeks, General Franks is going to come before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and we're going to have his overall assessment of the conflict. I think that's entirely appropriate because we'll be -- we'll be taking up the needs of the Defense Department and the men and women in the military on the Armed Services Committee.
But I'm looking for an overall review of the conflict, what we did right, what we did wrong, and what the needs are, including the issue of weapons of mass destruction. I remain confident that we will find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Additionally, in an interview with Salon.com published on June 13, 2003, on the same topic McCain stated: "Now, I think it's entirely appropriate now that regime change has been orchestrated -- and though the danger is certainly not over, the mission is 'accomplished' -- it's appropriate to have a hearing." However, on June 24, 2003, during an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, McCain appeared to criticize "Mission Accomplished," saying: "[I]f you keep losing American lives after 'mission accomplished' it can present difficulties. But if the American people are spoken to, if I might say a little straight talk, I think they will not only understand but be prepared to bear the burden."
As Media Matters also noted, on April 1, 2007, McCain responded to a question from a reporter about his statement that he "could walk through" neighborhoods in Baghdad today by stating: "Yeah, I just came from one." McCain was apparently referring to his trip to Baghdad's Shorja market, during which he and other members of his delegation were accompanied by more than 100 troops as well as several helicopters. On the April 8 edition of CBS' 60 Minutes, McCain admitted that he had "miss[poken]" when he declared the market safe.
McCain has also repeatedly praised the Bush administration's management of the conflict. For instance, while campaigning for Bush's re-election in 2004, McCain often touted the administration's wartime performance:
McCain expressed confidence that "we're on the right course" in
Iraq.
On the March 7, 2004, edition
of ABC's This Week, host George
Stephanopoulos asked McCain, "Are you confident we're on the right course
in Iraq?"
McCain answered: "I'm confident we're on the right course. ... I am
confident that an imperfect democracy is what we'll get out of Iraq will be vastly superior to what the people
of Iraq
had prior to this."
- McCain said Bush "has a good team around him" on national security issues. While campaigning for Bush in New Hampshire, McCain said: "I believe that he's strengthened our military. ... I think he strengthened our national defenses. I think he has a good team around him." [Manchester Union Leader, 9/3/04]
- McCain complimented Cheney's "hard-headed clear thinking" and guidance on Iraq. At a July 16, 2004, campaign rally in Lansing, Michigan, McCain appeared with Cheney, whom he described as "deputy commander-in-chief." McCain went on to say that Bush was able to "count on the experience and wisdom" of Cheney in making the decision to invade Iraq. McCain continued: "We are very fortunate that our president in these challenging days can rely on the counsel of a man who has demonstrated time and again the resolve, experience, and patriotism that will be required for success and the hard-headed clear thinking necessary to prevail in this global fight between good and evil."
McCain also expressed support for Bush's management in the war in 2006:
- McCain voiced confidence in Bush's ability to lead war in Iraq. On the August 20, 2006, edition of NBC's Meet the Press, guest host David Gregory asked McCain if he had confidence in Bush and his administration to "lead the war" in Iraq. McCain replied: "I do. I do. I have confidence in the president and I believe that he is well aware of the severity of the situation."















It's their OPINION, MMFA!!! GGGrrrrr....!! They can say what they want- facts and research need not apply...
MR. L:
You miss the POINT. The MSM (MainStream Media) has become the RIM (Rightwing Ideological Media), and thus both their REPORTING and their "OPINION PIECES" reflect rightwing talking points.
It is not an "OPINION" that McCain showed "foresight" on the Iraq war ... it is an OUTRIGHT FALSEHOOD. McCain was one of the top Bush Defenders and promoters of FALSE information about the war. McCain showed NO "foresight", and instead was complicit in the attempt to fool and lie to the American People. On the things McCain said at the outset of this war, McCain was FLAT-OUT WRONG. To say he had "foresight" is to LIE. It is to attempt to MISLEAD.
Plus, McCain CONTINUES to mislead, trying to indicate to the American people that it is "SAFE" to wander around shopping in Iraq's markets. That is a LIE, and he directly tried to promote that LIE.
In short, McCain is no better than BUSH, when it comes to the war. McCain has been just as wrong for just as long. Thus, McCain does not have the integrity to be President. Period.
I think Sean Penn showed more foresight than McCain.
Who really had foresight on the war?
Here’s one tidbit I found:
“… it is an open secret in Washington that the nation's uniformed military leadership is skeptical about the wisdom of war with Iraq. They share the concern that it may adversely affect the ongoing war against Al Qaeda and the continuing effort in Afghanistan by draining resources and armed forces already stretched so thin that many Reservists have been called for a second year of duty, and record numbers of service members have been kept on active duty beyond their obligated service.” --- Senator Ted Kennedy, September 2002
Looks like Kennedy and our military brass had it figured out at least to some discernable level. Too bad no one in the White House listened to them.
Waitaminnit, Pete- I listen to righty radio enough to know that Kennedy is an alcoholic communist who hates America and kills people.What does he know?
Right...and we have been assured over and over again that EVERYBODY thought Saddam was a threat and that he had WMD.
Howard Dean was right about nearly everything from the get go. But he screamed once, so everyone ignored what he had to say.
And just to back that up, check out this link to a speech Dean gave just a month before the Iraq invasion. He literally was right about everything. It's an incredible read, and it should be linked to every time someone attempts the old "everybody believed Saddam had wmd..." mantra.
[link to www.gwu.edu]
Glenn Greenwald has some comments about the speech here:
[link to glenngreenwald.blogspot.com]
Yeah but,...Chappaquiddick (sic?)
Yes, you're right, the constant references to Chappaquiddick are sic.
This is why I love MMFA.
This was a COMPLETE and THOROUGH debunking of this whole "maverick" ideal.
Yeah, but it was a vile, despicable, assasinatorious, Soros funded smeareable use of facts and transcripts and uh...uhhh,... aww forget it.
Wrong - a complete debunking of McCain's "maverick" status would take days to read, much less put together. Case in point: his "principled" stand against touture. He got gobs of fawning press attention for weeks over that, then quietly caved and supported/voted for a bill that essentially lets Bush torture anybody he wants.
That's his pattern. Make a lot of noise about "principles and integrity," soak up tons of adulation from an adoring press with no sense of history or accountability, then quietly fall into line with the rest of the wingnuts when anything important is on the line. He has run this same scam over and over - ever since he got into politics - knowing that he'll never really be called on it.
This, of course, would never be possible with a truly independent press.
You think maybe he should have gone into the travel business. John McCain Travel has a kinda ring to it.
What is up with the Post these days? As a D.C. expat, I expect this kind of nonsense from The Washington Times, but I thought the Post would maintain at least some tenuous link to reality...
But the only thing is, we were greeted as liberators, albeit for a short time. If a better job had been done anticipating the aftermath, I suspect we'd still be treated as such.
Isn't MM operating on a somewhat false premise here?