McCain Gets the Facts Wrong on Iraq — Again

Call it a pattern of mischaracterizations. John McCain recently got the facts wrong on Iraq again when he tried to portray Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's disastrous attempt to take on Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr as a success. (You can learn more about Sadr here.) He said this on the campaign trail:

"Apparently it was Sadr who asked for the ceasefire, declared a ceasefire. It wasn't Maliki. Very rarely do I see the winning side declare a ceasefire."

That's completely misleading. Not only did Sadr come out of the fighting just as strong as he was before (check out Robert Dreyfuss in The Nation), but his people were celebrating what they called a victory over the Prime Minister and, by extension, America:

At the Sadr Office in the centre of the massive slum in northeast Baghdad, home to 2.5 million impoverished Shias, the receptionists greeted visitors with sweets to mark their victory over Nouri al-Maliki, the increasingly isolated Iraqi Prime Minister, who directed the assault on Shia rogue militias in Basra, the lawless southern oil city. "This is for victory over Maliki," one said with a grin. "The fighting ended on our terms."

Certainly Mr al-Maliki’s huge gamble appeared to have failed yesterday. Having vowed to crush Shia militias with a 30,000-strong force in Basra, he ended up suing for peace with the people he had described as "worse than al-Qaeda." Al-Mahdi Army kept its weapons and turf.

...Mahmoud Othman, an independent Kurdish lawmaker, said that the latest spasm of violence merely showed Iran’s huge influence in Iraq, holding enormous sway over al-Mahdi Army and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the main Shia party in the Government, as well as its own militia, the Badr Brigades. "It's a big victory for Iran over America and for Moqtada over Maliki," he said. "Iran has the upper hand in Iraq. They are choosing the time to start trouble and they are choosing the time to end it."

And just to be clear, contra John Mccain, Sadr got the ceasefire entirely on his terms. Iraqi lawmakers loyal to Maliki had to travel to the Iranian holy city of Qom over the weekend to talk peace with the head of Iran's nasty Quds brigades. Only then did Sadr agree to have his militias stand down. This is not a good turn of events for Maliki:

The Qom discussions may or may not bring an end to the fighting but they almost certainly have undermined Maliki - who made repeated declarations that there would be no negotiations and that he would treat as outlaws those who did not turn in their weapons for cash. The blow to his own credibility was worsened by the fact that members of his own party had helped organize the Iran initiative.

McCain has credibility on the war with American voters. But that will (should?) end if he plays the role of an unfailing cheerleader instead of a honest observer.

Comments

If we elect this stupid son of a betch we deserve everything we get.........
Where are you Ron Paul???

Posted by: RTMAN on 04/01/08 at 9:09 AM Respond

McCain is about as sharp as a wooden spoon. What we are seeing here is The Shia merchant class represented by the SIIC and Maliki vs. The Shia poor class headed by Sadr fighting for Basra in order to control the elections in November and oil revenues. This is why Saddam and the Sunnis were able to oppress the majority Shia because of thier in-fighting and disorganization. If this was a test for Maliki they failed miserabley. They needed our support and agreed to a cease-fire because they were inaffective. Iran is playing all to ensure influence no matter who wins.

Posted by: Joe from Austin on 04/01/08 at 11:31 AM Respond

from swimming freestyle:

"John McCain has admitted he's clueless when it comes to the economy. (Fear not - he's checked out Alan Greenspan's book from the library). He's made it pretty clear he intends to run on his military record and gung ho, never mind the facts, position on Iraq. That might be OK if he could just get the details right."

http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com

Posted by: Jay McDonough on 04/01/08 at 12:05 PM Respond

McCain, McCain, McCain....

In spite of his professed hatred of war, he still seems to believe that winners "win" and get to crow about it, and that losers quietly crawl away with their tails between their legs, never to be seen or heard from again. That probably fits quite comfortably in his experience as a combat aviator (where the loser doesn't even get to crawl away.)

Complicated political situations simply do not fit into that morality play.

Posted by: Egalitare on 04/01/08 at 12:36 PM Respond

I wrote about the surge in Mahdi Army attacks before this whole thing happened. It's amazing to me that people like to talk about how we're "winning the war on terror" when they don't even know what's going on.

Posted by: Will Ellis on 04/01/08 at 3:29 PM Respond