> As far as getting out of Iraq is concerned, neither has said they are
> going to do it. Obama's said he's going to half do it and I think he
> probably will. I wouldn't be surprised if McCain half did it while saying
> he wouldn't. But I also wouldn't be surprised if he didn't do it at all --
> it would be totally justified based on his statements. But the idea that
> McCain is more likely to do this half draw-down, or to start it sooner, or
> more likely to go beyond it -- that seems to me completely unwarranted.
======================================
The Afghan war is more likely to influence US policy in Iraq than the
intentions of the candidates, which remain opaque in each case. If the
insurgency in Iraq continues to ebb, McCain as President would also have to
respond to growing pressure from the US military and its NATO allies to move
forces to Afghanistan, where the resistance is growing. Obama has been in
favour of bolstering the Afghan front for some time, including hot pursuit
of the Taliban into their Pashtun sanctuaries in northwest Pakistan. His
proposal to strengthen the US garrison in Afghanistan and to encroach on
Pakistan's sovereignty was designed to rebut accusations by Clinton and
McCain that he was another inexperienced liberal wuss whose Iraq policy
signalled a lack of imperialist resolve. His proprosal was then largely seen
as a diversion and scorned, but now he owes thanks to the Taliban, whose
resurgence will allow him to more credibly frame a US withdrawal from Iraq
in the language of realpolitik in his upcoming debates with McCain.