×
The invaluable Steve Benen reminds us of the time when John "100 years" McCain had this exchange with Chris Matthews:
Chris Matthews pressed McCain on the issue. “You’ve heard the ideological argument to keep U.S. forces in the Middle East. I’ve heard it from the hawks. They say, keep United States military presence in the Middle East, like we have with the 7th Fleet in Asia. We have the German…the South Korean component. Do you think we could get along without it?”McCain held fast, rejecting the very policy he urges today. “I not only think we could get along without it, but I think one of our big problems has been the fact that many Iraqis resent American military presence,” he responded. “And I don’t pretend to know exactly Iraqi public opinion. But as soon as we can reduce our visibility as much as possible, the better I think it is going to be.”The point isn't that McCain flip-flops, which he does. It's that his strategic thinking on matters like Iraq is curiously soft and immature. He's never come out with a statement explaining why he ceased believing that we should reduce our footprint and lower our visibility, nor how the last few years convinced him that the Iraqi people, far from resenting our presence, would in fact prefer to host our troops for the next century or so. Matt would argue that McCain is motivated by an honor-based conception of foreign policy, which fits his more troops faster-harder-nower philosophy quite well. On the other hand, McCain spent the middle years of the war -- 2004-05 or so -- trying to carve out the position of prudence and cautious support. What changed?
