ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



100 years?

Posted: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:14 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan
Does McCain really want troops in iraq for one hundred years? According to Obama the answer is yes.

In a back and forth at today's press conference, Obama insisted he was not taking out of context McCain's comments about keeping troops in Iraq for 100 years. Asked if his attack was disingenous, Obama had the following to say:

"I don’t think it’s unfair at all," Obama said. "John McCain, I mean, we can run the YouTube spot, has said that we will stay there as long as it takes. And if it takes another 100 years, he’s up for that commitment and that implies that there is some criteria by which we would understand how long it takes.

"John McCain has not been clear about what exactly would lead him to decide it's time to pull out. And so, you know, the problem that we’ve had both with John McCain and George Bush is that there’s no clear definition of success. There never was, and that’s why this has been such a profound strategic error. And you know, I think it is entirely fair to suggest that unless he’s got some criteria where by, at some point, we would be able to pull out our troops. For him to argue that, which he has repeatedly, that any suggestion that we withdraw troops is surrender. That implies that we will be there as long as he thinks it’s necessary for us to be there."

Obama was told that McCain had said the presence would be similar to what the United States had done with Germany and Japan in World War II. Obama seemed to agree with that notion but pointed to the costs of the war as a reason to avoid that type of engagement.

"Well we’ve been in South Korea for for 50 years," Obama said, "and he’s used that as an example as George Bush has. And that is decades, and we’re spending $10 billion a month in Iraq right now, which means that John McCain is willing to sign up for the prospect of spending as much as $150 billion or more each year for who knows how long. That is something that the US can't afford, and I think that is going to be a debate we are going to have in the general election should I be the nominee."

The RNC has pushed back hard on the issue. Today, it writes this:
“Yes, Barack Obama is misusing John McCain’s words. Today, Obama as much as acknowledged he has misrepresented McCain’s positions on Iraq.  Even though it’s well documented that there is no truth to the statement that Senator McCain wants to fight the Iraq war for another 100 years, Obama has continued to intentionally misrepresent McCain’s position. Following Senator Obama’s admission today that John McCain’s comments are in the spirit of our military presence in South Korea, we expect he will stop using this shameless political distortion to try and score points with the base of his party.
 
“During today’s press conference, Obama again failed to condemn Chairman Dean’s outrageous comments slandering Senator McCain as a ‘blatant opportunist’ for discussing his record of military service with the American people. Failing to heed his own call to reject negative politics is no way to establish credibility with voters looking for sincere leadership.”

For context, the "100 years" comment came up when McCain responded to questioner in a town hall, "Make it a 100," about the U.S.'s potential committment in Iraq. He added, "We've been in Japan for 60 years. We've been in South Korea for 50 years or so. … That would be fine with me...."

But what's left out often is what he said next...  "as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. … It's fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintained a presence in a very volatile part of the world."

Here's McCain's response on this to Tim Russert on Meet the Press.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

How many of those 'Hundred Years', does McCain think he'll be alive? Are those Real Time Years, or Dog Years, or Metheusalah Years where 900 is actually 60? If it's the last one, then 100 would actually be 6 or 7. Even that sounds like too much. The candidate closest to 1 Year or Less, is gonna win. The economy is in the tank, and the war is the fault. We could've sunk a Trillion or Two in the USA and not had either problem. A Hundred Years of Real Time Money comes to 20 or 30 Trillion, not adjusted for incompetancy. Do you want to leave your Grandchildren that? Just an Independent Observation.
Guys, Obama did not misspeak, McCain did say that, he did say that we could be staying in Iraq for a 100 years, he even said for a 150 years, "because living Iraq would be surrounding" I quote him. So, as always, the Reps are using their dirty tricks to accuse Barack but McCain did say that, this is the you tube video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=iUE-QmH-n4Q&feature=related
So I challenge anyone here to say the contrary...

As far as Hillary Clinton is concerned, being the wife of a president never qualified his wife to be a president. What did Hillary accomplish as first lady ? Apart from the fact that we now know that she lied about her trip in Bosnia (huge lie) and other lies she made, what did she accomplish when she was first lady ?

This country doesn't need a dynasty, we don't need Bush-Clinton-Bush- Clinton (Hillary)?

No dynasty, Americans wake up and fight for your liberty.
Repetition (think Reverand Wright) is a good thing.  I don't care if Obama mentions the 100 year war thang regarding McCain through November.  I personally want it on everyones minds that McCain is pro-war-especially since the American public is so vehematly (sp) against it.
it pains me to see americans whom i'm affectionate about, continue to bash Obama out of ill-informed, and ill-consdered arguements.

This guy is one of a kind candidate, he refuses to demonize his opponent for christ's sake.  Remember Samantha Powers called Clinton a "monster" and she had to resign? that's the standard. Too bad, we are too busy bashing and point out wrongdoings and often let the good stuff slips away.
It's too sad, how many people don't seem to understand the country, and the world which it's in.
Now find something else, for Pete's sake. And if you start with the "Iran next" crap, then have your constitutional expert Obama explain to you that a President can't go to war without congressional approval.

That's true. In our latest "non war" about 200k people have been killed, give or take a few tens of thousands.

This is a ludicrous argument. If McCain wants to bomb Iran if he is elected,  he will simply do it and inform Congress later. I can't beleive you are not familiar with either the War Powers Act or the fact that many presidents have simply have used the military and called it a "police action" Either you are naive or you are assuming we are.
http://www.thevaneljournal.com

the public will get tired of the write issue as more folks watch THE SPEECH. McCain on the other hand will have the Iraq war and the economy to deal with and neither will help him in the gen. War hero or not, people will vote with their wallets
Yes, as Senator McCain points out we have bases in Kuwait and Turkey.  In such cases our "security umbrella" is propping up either outright ditcatorial monarchies or militaristic regimes that are willing to do our bidding.  

He wants us to compare our potential long-term presence in Iraq to our presence in Germany and Japan after WWII.  Talk about apples and oranges or maybe we should say Satsuma and dates.  Does Senator McCain want us to believe that the Germans, the Japanese, the Koreans, the Turks, and the Kuwaitis (not the royals) really want to have a large contingent of U.S. military occupying parts of their country.  No doubt the elite of those countries welcome us but one sincerely doubts that regular citizens like this kind of domination by the U.S.  

This is what Senator Obama talks about when he says we need to change the mindset that got us into Iraq.  This idea that we can go anywhere, invade anyplace, occupy it indefinitely is imperialism pure and simple.  I doubt if our founding fathers intended for the USA to be an expansionist empire.  We cannot hail our democracy at home and be part of oppression and the abuse of civil rights abroad.  The hypocrisy is damaging for us internally and it is certainly damaging for our economic and political relations with other countries.  

One needs to remember that John McCain's father and grandfather were admirals in the navy - and the tradition probably goes back much further.   His worldview is shaped by his  family heritage.  There is no reason for the rest of us to adopt his militaristic and imperial view of the world.  We should be able to defend ourselves without imposing our will - and our military might - on others.  If we cannot, then we cannot really claim to be a democracy.
To: Laura Martinez

Your arguement is old news. Unless Rev. Wright is on the ballot in November your link has absolutely no merit.  Obama has answered all he needs to.  Look, if your angry because of his pastor, then email the Rev. Are you angry with Hillary because she stayed with Bill after he cheated on her?  Also, are you pissed off at McCain because he's a Republican and got an indorsement from Bush?  

Until people come up with valid arguements, these "Guilt by Association" claims are a waste of time.
Didn't this whole thing start because of our bases in the region.  Isn't that what Bin Laden claims his beef with us is?  Wasn't it our bases in Saudi Arabia?
McCain will probably prove a significantly more competent commander-in-chief than Bush, but they share the same basic worldview that got us into Iraq. That's really my only beef against McCain, unfortunately it's a big and inreconcilable one.

Why he deserves an UNendorsement -- http://www.nationalscold.com/2008/03/unendorsement-john-mccain.html
When asked about "100 years," McCain replied "maybe, 200 years." And then there was also his infamous, "Bomb, bomb, bomb, Bomb Iran." You showed the Bosnia videos and the Wright videos. Show the McCain--100 years videos. Oh right, McCain is Mr. Teflon, you wouldn't dare!
McCain has lived almost 100 years so he may be thinking that it really isn' that long. As for reality, we likely won't be able to sustain it for even a few more years. We will be bankrupted - which was Ben L.'s plan from the start. Once the superpowers get in beyond their means, it just keeps draining them. Many of the greatest nations have fallen for the same reason. So, it is likely that we will either get out as soon as possible and do it the best we can to have some leverage, or we will stay and the world will watch us get weaker and weaker in so many other ways. We are not the most powerful on earth. China owns us financially. (One more reason why we are afraid of hurting their feelings over the Olympic games and likely won't protest. It has nothing to do with justice, it has to do with being afraid of them). But, we will keep pushing Cuba to the wall because we still can. It makes us feel good. McCain is in another world, another time, another underestanding of where to go. He offers nothing to get us into the future. Both Hillary and Barack could, by the very nature of both of them bring along with the general Democratic vision, an opening for the USA to move in a very different direction. Democrats Unite! This is the moment. Suck up the angers if your candidate loses the nomination and move the nation ahead, not backwards into a Republican abyss.
Actually Tim from Mobile, the president can go to war for a certain amount of time without congressional approval.  That is how they quickly step into military situations that need to be dealt with sooner rather than later.  In terms of Iraq, the president got approval for prolonged war with a lie and the intention to occupy the country.  In terms of Iran, the president could intentionally go to war with Iran without congressional approval and force congress to support the war in the aftermath of the initial onslaught due to the need to now protect the US borders and embassies from attack from Iran.  And, ultimately get a forced congressional approval for a prolonged war.  That thought, is scary when you really think about it my friend.  
You cannot compare Germany or Korea or Japan with Iraq. I was was born Germany and for decades now the US forces are staying as guests of the German people. We welcome them and they used to be one of the largest employers in Germany.... BUT, Germany is a Christian nation. That makes all the difference. Staying in Iraq, what is considered Holy Land by the Muslims, is totally different. We - I am a US citizen - are NOT welcome and will never be welcomed as occupiers in Iraq or any other Muslim nation. Our troops will always be under attack there and our occupation of Iraq will continue to be the only advertisement Al Queda needs to recruit more kids as suicide bombers.
Tim, Mobile (Sent Monday, March 31, 2008 5:43 PM)

No, we need an intellectually engaged President.  One who will LISTEN to all sides of a debate and make up their mind based on facts.  McCain would only see a military solution -- it's in his genes.  
what a joke, I can not wait until the General election starts.  4 more years of Bush is not what we need and John McCain is just that.  You can not just throw 100 years out there and think you wont get attacked on it.  We shouldnt be in Korea either
I do not agree at all with McCain on IRAQ

However - in this case - BO did take the quote out of context

There are enough wrong things McCain says and has said about IRAQ and our involvement that we can let him have his 100 year in context comment - and still not like the McCain position

BO was taking a somewhat soundbitey shot - maybe a cheap shot - but hey - it is politics
So how long is ok Senator McCain if American soliders are being injured or wounded or killed in Iraq?

And how are you going to fund it?

And how are you going to get enough troops?

When are you going to institute a draft Senator McCain?

Because as soon as you do, we are out of there!


Jason, With all respects, McPeak is not Obama's top national security advisor... He just isn't.

I challenge you to back up this with any link claiming this.
Lets see Obama we are misconstruing the Rev. Wright comments and taking them out of context but you’re not doing the same here???? Give me a break.
Obama is an expert in the field of semantics & in the
art of smoozing--what you see, is NOT what you'd get!!
He's an illusionist. McCain did NOT say he was willing
to FIGHT the war in Iraq for 100 yrs.--Obama KNOWS
that (again, semantics!!!). Problem is,too large of
a segment of the voting public is of the same
mentality as the people interviewed on "Jaywalking"--
they believe Obama's words & HE'S COUNTING ON THAT!!!
In Obama, I sense the handiwork of L. Farakan &
J. Wright (plus who knows who else??). NO THANK YOU!!!
Too scary a scenario for me!!!!
*a military-wise leader?*

Tim, you need to appear on Jay Leno along side Clinton. Your judgment is absurd and laughable. How can you call McCain wise? He doesn't even know where the enemy is or the difference between Sunni and Shiite.

Worst of all, he didn't know Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, began an offensive in Basra which McCain said they did without consulting the U.S.  Despite the fact that Muqtada al-Sadr had ordered his Shiite militiamen off the streets.

BTW:  If you bring McCain with you, don't forget to hold his hand; nice e seems to be a little absent minded at times.
Our constitutional expert Obama said he is against a stupid war. So it seems like he won’t go to a stupid war without congressional approval.



Just another typical lying Liberal.
When either one of the canidates realise that the ARABs world don't want US troop on arab land.  Maybe then they can figure an way to get out and still have peace.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=845454

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google