McCain predicts Iraq War will end in 2013

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,292
1,842
126
So McCain is ALREADY conceding that he will not be able to end the Iraq War at any time during his four year term? That's persuasive.

Not to mention the thought of relecting someone who will be 76 to the most important job in the world, and one of the most (if not the most) stressful jobs.

Nice how he papered over North Korea, Pakistan, etc. Doe anyone really believe those hot spots can continue to fester for another four years unchanged?
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
McCain should've just said "I predict everything will be miserable when my first term is over", right? After all, I'm sure that's the same thing his opponents would say in the same situation.

At least he'd still have *your* respect! :thumbsup:
Or he could get out of the psychic business and talk about HOW he's going to do those things. It's just me but I have zero respect for people that are all talk. This is the same idiot who said we could've won in Vietnam. That's after he got shot down and became a POW. Instead of accepting the fact that certain people don't like to be ruled over by foreigners and get the fuck out their country, he throws this patriotic garbage about "winning".
the hope. it's too audacious.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I predict it will end by 2010. I think we have just about had enough of Iraq. It is time for them to Man Up!
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,698
5,686
126
Originally posted by: BoberFett
We've been in Iraq for over five years now. That's longer than it took to topple both Germany and Japan in WW2. Now McDouchebag is saying it's going to take another five? Just how incompetent is our military?
When you want to green light harsh methods of filtering terrorists from the general population, and are WILLING to see thousands of militant and innocent Iraqis die from our hand - then get back to us. Cause until then ? it?s our own policy they permits the harboring of terrorists in Iraq.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
The war might end in 2013, but our troops will be there until 2108.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
3
0
This is the guy who said success in iraq would be "fairly easy" and there wouldn't be house to house fighting. He has zero credibility.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
McCain had a plan for Vietnam also. It was called don't get shot down . And when that plan ran SOL, he became rather irrelevant.
 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: Lemon law
McCain had a plan for Vietnam also. It was called don't get shot down . And when that plan ran SOL, he became rather irrelevant.
Yet you still talk about him. Who is it that irrelevant?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: BoberFett
We've been in Iraq for over five years now. That's longer than it took to topple both Germany and Japan in WW2. Now McDouchebag is saying it's going to take another five? Just how incompetent is our military?
WW 2 in Europe started in 1939 Germany did not regain full independence until 1949, ten years.

The war in the Pacific took even longer. Started in 1937 and our post war occupation lasted until 1952.
Why are you relating Germany's invasion of Poland to how long it took the US to invade, occupy and rebuild Germany? Oh, and the war in the Pacific started in 1937 according to who!? Are you referring to some Japanese action in China? Again, why would Japan's actions in China have any bearing on how long it took the US to do something?

These are exceptionally dishonest metrics, even from you man. Even comparing the dates of declaration of war by Germany and Japan on the US is not particularly telling as actual large scale hostilities took a long time to happen afterwards due to distance as opposed to Iraq in which they were instantaneous, but at least it's as good a start date to pick as any. To base our war metrics on wars with third parties is just dumb.
If we want to use ProfJohn numbers, let's start counting in Iraq from the FIRST TIME we invaded the damn country.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,994
100
106
Great, more comparison to the occupations following WW2. I think we can see now after so many years that this situation is completely dissimilar. Both Japan and Germany were utterly destroyed as we fought a war without both hands tied behind our back. The populations had no real will to resist by then, although there were a few small groups that did. Iraq today is far from that in the aftermath of OIF.

It is great to hear that McCain will have this over with by 2013. I suppose he is counting on the world ending a year prior when it is supposedly going to. :p
 

SoundTheSurrender

Diamond Member
Mar 13, 2005
3,126
0
0
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: BoberFett
We've been in Iraq for over five years now. That's longer than it took to topple both Germany and Japan in WW2. Now McDouchebag is saying it's going to take another five? Just how incompetent is our military?
Instead of just narrowing it down to "we won!", let's get the full context of what he actually said.

"The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension," McCain said.

The violence in Iraq will persist, the candidate believes, but it will be "spasmodic and much reduced." But civil war will be prevented, armed militias will be disbanded, security forces will become "professional and competent" and the government will be able to impose "its authority in every province of Iraq" and properly defend its borders.
Sounds reasonable.

And yeah, it took us less time to topple Germany and Japan but it took several more years to get functioning governments up and running. And Germany and Japan didn't have the kinds of problems that Iraq does.
His words suck.

America disbanded the Iraqi military back in 2003. One doesn't need to be a genius to know that 90%+ of those ex-military men are fighting for the other team now since America disbanded them and cut their pay back then.

McCain is an asshole, put him in a retirement home or something.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
2013 sounds about right; but, given our current progress, I'm guessing that our troop numbers will be down to about 30k before then -- regardless of who gets elected in 2008!.

Originally posted by: Lemon law
McCain had a plan for Vietnam also. It was called don't get shot down . And when that plan ran SOL, he became rather irrelevant.
Wtf!? :confused:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Well, there's quite a bit to coment on in his speech.

I'll just insert comments into the text below.

COLUMBUS, Ohio (CNN) -- Sen. John McCain thinks the Iraq War will be won but the threat from the Taliban in Afghanistan won't yet be eliminated, even though Osama bin Laden will be captured or killed, by 2013.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee made both statements in a speech in which he envisions the state of affairs at the end of what would be his first term if he is elected president.

McCain's speech, delivered in Columbus, Ohio, Thursday, also lists objectives he intends to achieve in his first term -- if he is elected president.

"What I want to do today is take a little time to describe what I would hope to have achieved at the end of my first term as president. I cannot guarantee I will have achieved these things," McCain said.

The Arizona senator said he believes the United States will have a smaller military presence in Iraq that will not play a direct combat role, and he predicts that al Qaeda in Iraq will be defeated.

"By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom.

"The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension," McCain said.

The violence in Iraq will persist, the candidate believes, but it will be "spasmodic and much reduced." But civil war will be prevented, armed militias will be disbanded, security forces will become "professional and competent" and the government will be able to impose "its authority in every province of Iraq" and properly defend its borders.

McCain also said he also believes the "threat from a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan will be greatly reduced but not eliminated" and that U.S. and NATO forces will remain in the country "to help finish the job, and continue operations against the remnants of al Qaeda."

I don't see anything wrong or even exceptional in these remarks. Personally, I tend to think there is a very good probrability that this can be achieved in a much shorter timeline.

It's also in the realm of possibility that no matter what has been accomplished, we may be moving out with haste come the end of this year. The UN mandate for our presence expires at year-end and the Iraqi parliment itself must approve any extention. With new Iraqi elections scheduled for November, we don't even know who will be in power.

But as to the achievements McCain lists, if Iraqi progress continues and they do get the Southern area cleaned up (with or without al-Sadr's help) oil exploration and drilling can begin. They've got an unbelievable amount of oil, once that money starts flowing there's good reason to believe that Iraq can change dramatically for the better. But as McCain says, there will be some level of problems, no one expects it turn into a peaceful paradise. They just need some more improvements in security to get the money spigots flowing




Pakistan will work with the United States in deploying counter-insurgency tactics in the al Qaeda-laden tribal regions, the Arizona Republican said.

^ This strikes me as overly optimistic.

As for the leader of al Qaeda, McCain believes "the increase in actionable intelligence that the counterinsurgency produced led to the capture or death of Osama bin Laden, and his chief lieutenants."
Not a big deal IMO. At this point, capturing/killing OBL strikes me as more a publicity coup than any thing else


"There is no longer any place in the world al Qaeda can consider a safe haven," McCain said.

He also believes that in 2013, there still will not have been a "major terrorist attack in the United States since September 11, 2001."

Other milestones McCain hopes to see at the end of what would be his first term are:


Witnessing "a reluctant Russia and China" cooperating in "pressuring Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions, and North Korea to discontinue its own," because of "concerted action by the great democracies of the world."


Significantly increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps, which will be "better equipped and trained to defend us."
Anybody else think a Dem controlled Congress might have some say in this proposed military build up?

The application of "stiff diplomatic and economic pressure" by the United States -- acting in concert with a newly formed League of Democracies -- to cause Sudan to agree to a multinational peacekeeping force, with NATO countries providing logistical and air support, to stop the genocide in Darfur.
Ahh.. See, this shouldn't be overlooked so readily. A "newly formed League of Democracies"? I don't understand why this hugely important idea doesn't get much attention from the MSM. This is perhaps the *biggest new idea* this whole campaign. A total new framework for addressing global problems. Out with the U.N. and in with the LoD. Russia and China won't be part of it, if he's serious about his *definition* of democracies. To totally restructure the way the majority of the world's governments works together completely dwarfs every thing else mentioned.

Several years of robust economic growth for the United States, with Americans again having confidence in their economic future.


Millions of taxpayers filing under a flat tax and saving billions in the cost of preparing their returns.
Again, good luck with this. This is in Congress's hands.

The world food crisis ending, low inflation, and a "much improved" quality of life "not only in our country, but in some of the most impoverished countries around the world."

The two below really beg for some explanation of how they wil be accomplished
More accessible health care for Americans and an easing on the pressure on Medicare due to the reduction in the growth of health care costs.


A United States well on its way to "independence from foreign sources of oil."
Fern
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
11
76
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: BoberFett
We've been in Iraq for over five years now. That's longer than it took to topple both Germany and Japan in WW2. Now McDouchebag is saying it's going to take another five? Just how incompetent is our military?
Instead of just narrowing it down to "we won!", let's get the full context of what he actually said.

"The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension," McCain said.

The violence in Iraq will persist, the candidate believes, but it will be "spasmodic and much reduced." But civil war will be prevented, armed militias will be disbanded, security forces will become "professional and competent" and the government will be able to impose "its authority in every province of Iraq" and properly defend its borders.
Sounds reasonable.

And yeah, it took us less time to topple Germany and Japan but it took several more years to get functioning governments up and running. And Germany and Japan didn't have the kinds of problems that Iraq does.
His words suck.

America disbanded the Iraqi military back in 2003. One doesn't need to be a genius to know that 90%+ of those ex-military men are fighting for the other team now since America disbanded them and cut their pay back then.

McCain is an asshole, put him in a retirement home or something.
The elements of the Iraqi army that were worth a damn were kept. They all had to be fired as part of the process, but quite a few of them were re-hired by the new government. And IIRC they are better paid now than under Sadaam.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,994
100
106
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: BoberFett
We've been in Iraq for over five years now. That's longer than it took to topple both Germany and Japan in WW2. Now McDouchebag is saying it's going to take another five? Just how incompetent is our military?
Instead of just narrowing it down to "we won!", let's get the full context of what he actually said.

"The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension," McCain said.

The violence in Iraq will persist, the candidate believes, but it will be "spasmodic and much reduced." But civil war will be prevented, armed militias will be disbanded, security forces will become "professional and competent" and the government will be able to impose "its authority in every province of Iraq" and properly defend its borders.
Sounds reasonable.

And yeah, it took us less time to topple Germany and Japan but it took several more years to get functioning governments up and running. And Germany and Japan didn't have the kinds of problems that Iraq does.
His words suck.

America disbanded the Iraqi military back in 2003. One doesn't need to be a genius to know that 90%+ of those ex-military men are fighting for the other team now since America disbanded them and cut their pay back then.

McCain is an asshole, put him in a retirement home or something.
The elements of the Iraqi army that were worth a damn were kept. They all had to be fired as part of the process, but quite a few of them were re-hired by the new government. And IIRC they are better paid now than under Sadaam.
Out of sheer curiosity, where did you see that? It would make sense that this would be the case, but I haven't seen anything that supports it.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
10,879
2,634
136
Well I'm convinced now... McCain WOULD be just a third Bush term.
Remember, Bush and Cheney stated many many times "just six more months".
And many American's believed that, over and over and over (and over and over).
NOW, McCain says 4 years? GIVE MEEEEE A BREAK!!!!!!! (or a voting booth)
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
Originally posted by: sportage
Well I'm convinced now... McCain WOULD be just a third Bush term.
Remember, Bush and Cheney stated many many times "just six more months".
And many American's believed that, over and over and over (and over and over).
NOW, McCain says 4 years? GIVE MEEEEE A BREAK!!!!!!! (or a voting booth)
isn't that exactly what Hillary and Obama are saying?
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,101
194
106
I really wonder how much 'Thought' went into his speech this time. I figure he came up with 5 years since, he could skate though his first term (if elected) .... and still have 1 more year to take action.... Or maybe he figures there is only 5 years of oil left? Maybe we could pump most of it out of the ground in 5 years?

Hmmmmmm.......


So, isn't this a flip flop? First were gonna be there for 100 now he cuts it back by 95 years. Sheesh. What a tool.

Edit.....

And this isn't a war. It's a freakshow ... CF beyond belief!
 

Foxery

Golden Member
Jan 24, 2008
1,709
0
0
Originally posted by: WiseOldDude
Didn't Rumsfeld say 5 - 6 month "tops", but that was so long ago I can't remember.
Yeah. He said that when we first started!

Don't worry. They say the new Iraqi government will be ready to take over in September....... 2007.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: ericlp
I really wonder how much 'Thought' went into his speech this time. I figure he came up with 5 years since, he could skate though his first term (if elected) .... and still have 1 more year to take action.... Or maybe he figures there is only 5 years of oil left? Maybe we could pump most of it out of the ground in 5 years?

Hmmmmmm.......


So, isn't this a flip flop? First were gonna be there for 100 now he cuts it back by 95 years. Sheesh. What a tool.

Edit.....

And this isn't a war. It's a freakshow ... CF beyond belief!
1) McCain never said that we'd still be fighting in Iraq for 100 years -- anyone who says he did is entirely full of shit. Those who believe he said that, or meant that, fall into the same category of morons who still believe Obama is a Muslim.

2) Know this: We'll be in Iraq the same length of time regardless of who becomes President in 2008.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,292
1,842
126
So palehorse, what you are saying is that McCain meant to say he intends for the USA to have long term, essentially permanent bases in Iraq? And you and he think that is condusive to either acheiving peace OR stability in the Mideast? What koolaid are you guys drinking?

Permanent occupation of a Mideast country is a surefire way to continue recruitment and development of anti-US terrorists for the foreseeable future.

Has a hostile "permanent" occupation of any country ever worked?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY