That Wacky, Wacky John McCain Posted by Michael Cohen

It pains me to include John McCain in the wacky, wacky hall of shame, but after reading excerpts from his speech today on Iraq, I feel as though I have no choice. Move over Chuck and Bill, we have a new entrant.

To McCain's credit he at least takes the rhetorical bait that many of us at DA have been urging him to take by laying out what victory means in Iraq. But his comments are as divorced from reality as those of the President.

Success in Iraq is the establishment of a generally peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic state that poses no threat to its neighbors and contributes to the defeat of terrorists. It is the advance of religious tolerance over violent radicalism. It is a level of security that allows the Iraqi authorities to govern, the average person to live a normal life, and international entities to operate. It is a situation in which the rule of law, after decades of tyranny, takes hold. It is an Iraq where Iraqi forces have the responsibility for enforcing security in their country, and where American troops can return home, with the honor of having secured their country's interests at great personal cost, and helping another people achieve peace and self-determination. Today these goals are within reach.

Does any serious observer of the current situation in Iraq believe that we are anywhere close to achieving these goals? This is a wonderful image of Iraq's future, but nothing that has happened over the past five years lends to the credence to the notion that these goals are actually achievable. There is no application of the rule of law; in recent fighting in Basra, Iraqi security forces showed themselves incapable of not only defeating the enemy, but actually engaging them and Iraqi authorities have shown virtually no inclination to govern even at a time of improved security.

But, as if all this isn't bad enough, look at the rest of the excerpt released by the McCain campaign:

'Never despair,' Winston Churchill once said. And we did not despair. We were tested, and we rose to the challenge. Some political leaders close their eyes to the progress that the surge has made possible, and want only to argue about the past. We can have that debate. I profoundly disagree with those who say we would all be better off if we had left Saddam Hussein in power. Americans should be proud that they led the way in removing a vicious dictator and opening the door to freedom, stability, and prosperity in Iraq and across the Middle East. 

When in doubt Churchillian rhetoric never fails! But actually McCain raises a point here that I believe is worthy of closer examination - the notion that we are better off now that Saddam Hussein is out of power. Does anyone really believe this? Considering that Saddam had no WMD and no ties to Al Qaeda how exactly is America better off having gone to war in Iraq? Four thousand Americans have died, billions, even trillions of dollars have been squandered, our international prestige has taken a dramatic and possibly permanent hit and Al Qaeda is stronger than it was before 9/11. Tell me again how this was good for America. To my mind, it is practically incontrovertible that America is worse off for having deposed Saddam Hussein from power.

Indeed, it's difficult to even argue that Iraq is better off. In fact, considering the sheer number of deaths over the past five years and the potential for greater violence, one could make a pretty compelling case that Iraq is far worse off now than it was when Saddam was in power. Considering that the man was one of the worst dictators of the second half of the 20th century that is a pretty impressive achievement.

I hear this type of language from GOPers all the time, but honestly I wish some enterprising reporter would really push back and ask how exactly it is that we are better off with Saddam gone. I know reporters love John McCain, but I think it's a question that deserves an answer.