by Mark Silva
The war returns to the campaign stage this week, with Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama in line for the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Orlando today and Tuesday, followed by the vacationing President Bush on Wednesday. -- Hurricane-to-be Fay or a sudden running-mate announcement permitting.
McCain addresses the veterans at the Orange County Convention Center this morning at 9 am EDT. McCain, who has maintained that he'd rather "lose a campaign than lose a war," also has asserted that Obama would rather "forfeit'' victory in Iraq than forfet his election as president. Bush, slated to follow the two candidates on the third day of the convention, asserts that his "surge'' of U.S. forces has done its job in Iraq.
McCain, when asked over the weekend at the Saddleback Civil Forum, what three advisers he heeds most, named first: Gen. David Petraeus, commander of multinational forces in Iraq and executor of the surge, whose combat forces have been withdrawn. He credits Petraeus with a success in Iraq that is inspiring young soldiers to soldier on.
Obama, when asked to name the wise people in his life, started with his wife and grandmother -- allowing that he had confided in his grandmother during most big decisions. Today in Pensacola, Obama campaign advisers will be seeking some advice -- "insight, ideas and feedback'' -- from veterans at a "Forum for Change.'' A similar Obama campaign event in Tampa was cancelled today, in the interest of allowing people time to prepare for a tropical storm possibly heading their way.
Of course, Obama could shift the focus from the war early this week with his announcement of a running mate. He has but days left before the Democratic National Convention opening in Denver a week from today.
The advancing tropical storm in the Caribbean may pose little threat to the state with 27 electoral votes or the veterans convention in Orlando. If it comes ashore in Tampa as a Category One hurricane, it could head on north toward the Carolinas as a weakened storm.
Bush, for his part, will be paying his respects to another storm following his appearance at the veterans convention on Wednesday -- stopping at the still-recovering Mississippi shore pummeled by Hurricane Katrina on his way back to his Texas ranch.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
The purpose of the surge was to give the Iraqi Government time to "reconcile."
Not only are they not reconciling, they just continue to rat hole oil billions away while U.S. taxpayers pick up the cost of Iraq rebuilding and security. Barack Obama wants to get us out of Iraq while leaving a security force behind large enough to look out for our interests. Dubya and John McCain want the U.S. taxpayers to continue to be chumps.
Posted by: Doug Zook | August 18, 2008 8:08 AM
So McCain, Obama, and BushieBoy are courting the evangelicals and the veterans. Hello! There are other people out here in this country we call America. Are we electing a Messiah? Are we simply choosing a President for their ability to wage war? What about a President who leads and not just follows? What about a President who understands the complexities of the 21st century? How about a President who is more than just a one-trick pony?>
Posted by: Tess | August 18, 2008 8:45 AM
Mr. Zook, please explain more of Obama's Iraqi plan. How big is that security force suppose to be? 10,000? 50,000? 100,000?
U.S. troops already have begun to draw down in Iraq. In fact, the current Bush plan has troop reductions going into next year. So exactly how is the Obama plan any different? I know the Obama plan keeps changing from venue to venue, day to day.
Posted by: Green Trees | August 18, 2008 8:57 AM
If you like Iraq, the war and its prosecution and mismanagement, then vote for McSame, cause he's never leaving it.
Posted by: athena | August 18, 2008 9:10 AM
John Mccain will show up to pander to Vets, but he won't show up to actually do his job and vote on issues crucial to vets.
His actions (or should I say inaction) speaks far louder than his empty, meaningless words. He cares nothing for vets, and they know it. He has insulted every single member of the VFW, and every single member of our armed forces.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/08/troops-deployed-abroad-give-61.html
Posted by: MBT | August 18, 2008 9:13 AM
Green Trees,
When will the Iraqi Government be reconciling? You know the - the whole point of the surge.
Here's the link to Obama's Iraq War withdraw plan you requested:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/#phased-withdrawal
Posted by: Doug Zook | August 18, 2008 9:28 AM
Green Trees, please explian Mccain's Iraq plan. 100 years? 16 months? never? Will he agree to leave if the Iraqi's demand a time line? Is he going to transfer all the troops to the Iraq/Pakistan border? Please explain the McCain plan of the week. Thanks.
Posted by: MBT | August 18, 2008 9:43 AM
1-McCain, when asked over the weekend at the Saddleback Civil Forum, what three advisers he heeds most
2-Obama, when asked to name the wise people in his life...
They weren't asked two different questions.....the questions were the same, but nice effort at trying to minimize Obama's answer to which influential people he would seek advice from while in office....oh, and I believe that he was told NOT TO INCLUDE HIS WIFE, which he did anyway. So, that would leave GRAMMIE, and Ted etc.....!
Posted by: I think I know | August 18, 2008 9:49 AM
Is this the same grandmother Obama now says is wise whom he previously identified as a "typical white person?" She wasn't so wise back in his mind when Obama was commenting about what he identified as bigoted white people.
Posted by: Erica | August 18, 2008 9:59 AM
Posted by: Erica | August 18, 2008 9:59 AM
Thank you for your expert opinion that racism doesn't exist. Not sure what world you live in, but it is nice to see it doesn't on your planet. Keep those eyes closed and the world looks great doesn't it? Tell ya what...bring your grandmother down here to the south and lets stick an Obama bumper sticker on her car and let her go. Up for it? Of course you didn't have anything to do with slavery....but then again you didn't have anything to do with the declaration of independence or the bible either.
Posted by: bill r. | August 18, 2008 10:27 AM
Thank you for the link, Mr. Zook. Unfortunately, it still doesn't say much. Obama has noted his 16-month plan in the past, but also at a Democratic debate he and Ms. Clinton said troops would remain in Iraq until at least 2013. I also want to see how a possible President Obama equates his policy with reality, with what the generals in Iraq tell him.
To those asking about McCain's plan. Well, the Arizona senator says he is in this to win. His 100 years comment was an off-hand comment, which most intelligent people should recognize. His point was that we have a had a presence in Germany and Japan since WWII. We are still in those countries not to make sure they behave, but to provide stability and strength in the region. More than likely, the U.S. will need to keep a presence in the Middle East for the foreseeable future. Not just because of Islamic radicals, but also to counter the Russians and Chinese.
Posted by: Green Trees | August 18, 2008 11:32 AM
Mr. Trees,
"Well, the Arizona senator says he is in this to win."
What, pray tell, is the definition of "win?"
Posted by: Doug Zook | August 18, 2008 11:50 AM
Green Trees-
So in otherwords McCain has no plan for Iraq other than to abdicate his responsibilities as Commander in Chief, and to take orders from the Generals he is supposed to be giving orders to. He will ignore the strongly expressed Iraqi demands that the US withdraw and force an accupation on them against their will.
Got it.
Posted by: MBT | August 18, 2008 11:59 AM
While Green Trees can speak for himself, a commander in chief does not abdicate his responsibilities when he listens to the generals in command. In reality, a commander in chief would be abdicating his duty if he DIDN'T listen to his generals.
One reason we "lost" Vietnam was because politicians got involved and didn't listen to the generals in the field.
And Doogie, in regarding to what is a "win," sorry but I gave up that ship long ago. Lefties haven't a clue what winning a war means, they only have interest in losing them.
Posted by: John D | August 18, 2008 3:25 PM
John D- Listening to your Generals does not mean that you must agree with them. Just about every war President we have had has, at times, denied the Generals what they wanted.
Lincoln was constantly at odds with Generals, especially McClellan,who he ended up replacing when he would not follow Lincoln's direction.
FDR overrode George Marshall's desire to invade France in both 1942 and 1943. He instead backed the North African and Sicily/Italy campaigns against Marshall's wishes.
Truman/MacArthur is a prime example of a President makeing the correct decision not to follow the recommendation of the General in the field.
Another great example is Bush Sr's decision to terminate the ground war in the first Gulf War against Schwarzkopf's wishes. Bush understood that there were wider consequences to deposing Saddam, and that a long drawn out occupation wasn't in the interest of the US.
I see no signs that McCain would ever stand up to the Generals like these past Presidents. The President is Commander in Chief. He has responsibility to final decision, taking into account a great many factors that the Generals in the field are not in a position to consider.
Posted by: MBT | August 18, 2008 4:06 PM