NationStates Jolt Archive

SPRINGFIELD, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain said on Friday he fears that al Qaeda or another extremist group might attempt spectacular attacks in Iraq to try to tilt the U.S. election against him.

McCain, at a town hall meeting in this Philadelphia suburb, was asked if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him.

"Yes, I worry about it," McCain said. "And I know they pay attention because of the intercepts we have of their communications ... The hardest thing in warfare is to counter someone or a group of individuals who are willing to take their own lives in order to take others."

At his campaign event and subsequent news conference, McCain also criticized U.S. Senate Republicans for not joining him and 28 other senators in a one-year moratorium on controversial spending projects, known as earmarks that benefit specific cities or towns and that McCain considers wasteful.

The Arizona senator said it showed that his fellow Republicans were "not responding to the will of the people."

The Senate on Thursday night voted 71-29 against the moratorium. McCain and Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama, an Illinois senator, and Hillary Clinton, a New York senator, all voted for the legislation.

McCain is a stalwart supporter of President George W. Bush's troop build-up in Iraq, while sharply critical of the way the war was managed until the increase, and his political fortunes have improved as casualties have declined in Iraq in recent months.

He disagrees strongly with campaign pledges by Clinton and Obama to withdraw U.S. troops speedily if either of them are elected in November.

McCain, soon to depart on a Middle East and Europe trip with two Senate colleagues, said recent deadly attacks in Iraq show that al Qaeda in Iraq is not defeated.

He said is concerned "they might be able to carry out some spectacular suicide attacks but we do have them on the run."

"We have achieved enormous success but they are still a very viable and tough enemy. There is no doubt in my mind that the surge is succeeding. Thank God for Gen. (David) Petraeus, one of the greatest generals in American history."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080314/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_dc_2



Unless he's gone completely senile, McCain knows damn well this hypothetical "attack" he's so afraid of would tip the election in his favor. Methinks this is fear-mongering to put the current administration to shame. I also suspect that given the question he was asked at this event in Pennsylvania was "if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him.", that whoever asked him that was a plant. Snake oil, anyone?

Reverse Psychology! McCain is smarter than we thought!!!:eek:... Either that or he's finally gone crazy:p

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080314/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_dc_2



Unless he's gone completely senile, McCain knows damn well this hypothetical "attack" he's so afraid of would tip the election in his favor. Methinks this is fear-mongering to put the current administration to shame. I also suspect that given the question he was asked at this event in Pennsylvania was "if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him.", that whoever asked him that was a plant. Snake oil, anyone?

it's iffy at best.

After all, attacks would show that the Republican plans are not working, show that a change in leadership is needed, and drive home that it was a republican that got us in to this mess just as easily as the other.

it's all dependant on how it's reported and what the response is.

It's scary to think that this man might actually become the next president. :(

Assuming this article is trustworthy.
This sounds like some form of paranoia, i think he needs a mind doctor.

so he worries that terror attacks might hurt HIM

what about the people who would be maimed or killed. what about their loved ones? shouldnt he think of THEM first?

way to be self centered.

Don't get me wrong, the fearmongering from Republicans in the last eight years has really pissed me off, but McCain could very well be right to fear that Al Qaeda will attempt an attack. Granted, an attack would probably tip the election in his favor rather than against him, but if we grant his (questionable) assumption that Al Qaeda wants a Democratic president, what they believe will happen might well be different from what will actually happen.

It's scary to think that this man might actually become the next president. :(

If that happens...revolution time!

*starts handing out guillotines, guns, and assorted goodies*

Someone should compile the highlights of these American political campaigns and sell the movie as a comedy.

Someone should compile the highlights of these American political campaigns and sell the movie as a comedy.

Or a horror movie. ;)

Assuming this article is trustworthy.
This sounds like some form of paranoia, i think he needs a mind doctor.

The report is from Reuters, which is generally regarded as a reputable news source. I agree with your paranoia diagnosis, though.

Why the hell would they want Republicans to lose? McCain in particular? He's said he'll keep troops in Iraq forever. They couldn't ask for a better training ground.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080314/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_dc_2



Unless he's gone completely senile, McCain knows damn well this hypothetical "attack" he's so afraid of would tip the election in his favor. Methinks this is fear-mongering to put the current administration to shame. I also suspect that given the question he was asked at this event in Pennsylvania was "if he had concerns that anti-American militants in Iraq might ratchet up their activities in Iraq to try to increase casualties in September or October and tip the November election against him.", that whoever asked him that was a plant. Snake oil, anyone?
No, he's right. A Tet Offensive-like attack in Iraq would hand the Democrats the election. However, an attack here would likely hand him the election unless Obama can give an inspiring speech on how we wil overcome it (which he certainly would do). I think I read somewhere the insurgents are gearing up for a major attack. There hasn't really been any Tet-like thing. If Ramadan were in October, it'd be the perfect time. And also, I think they like the American presence. It's easier to kill Americans and get their people trained.

Why the hell would they want Republicans to lose? McCain in particular? He's said he'll keep troops in Iraq forever. They couldn't ask for a better training ground.

QFT.

Why the hell would they want Republicans to lose? McCain in particular? He's said he'll keep troops in Iraq forever. They couldn't ask for a better training ground.

yeah its a great recruiting tool.

it's iffy at best.

After all, attacks would show that the Republican plans are not working, show that a change in leadership is needed, and drive home that it was a republican that got us in to this mess just as easily as the other.

it's all dependant on how it's reported and what the response is.

IF it was a matter of voters carefully considering the facts and the logical conclusions that they would lead to, then the failures of the Republican party would count against them.

In practice however, the sort of people who vote for Republicans are the sort of people who have a psychological need to look up to what they think of as a strong leader. What Republican strategists themselves call "Bad Dads."

You know the sort of woman that always seems to go from one abusive relationship to another? Most of the time its because she intuitively feels that abuse indicates strength, and strength makes her feel safe. That's a Republican voter. Like an abused wife who leaves her husband when she feels that there is support for her elsewhere, Republican voters jump ship when they think its safe to do so. Terrorism drives them right back to Daddy.

Unless he's gone completely senile, McCain knows damn well this hypothetical "attack" he's so afraid of would tip the election in his favor. Snake oil, anyone?
Absolutely....snake oil indeed (http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2005.00060.x?cookieSet=1):

As Cohen et al. note, there was a “real-life” mortality salience induction on October 29, 2004, just four days before the election, when Americans watched the first video of Osama bin Laden in nearly two years. The broadcast of that video raised awareness of Bush’s signature campaign issue, the war on terror, and many argue that it determined the U.S. election.

As bin Laden’s intervention in the American election came just months after the Spanish general election was upended by a series of bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, it appears that the outcomes of elections in not one but two Western democracies in 2004 were determined in a significant way by actions of the al Qaeda network.
American politics...uuuuggghhhhh!!

Why the hell would they want Republicans to lose? McCain in particular? He's said he'll keep troops in Iraq forever. They couldn't ask for a better training ground.

Exactly. This is why I scoff at people when they say "Terrorists want us to elect a democrat!!"


Thats absurd. A democratic president at this stage in the game would take a more even handed approach to the Middle East and strengthen alliances with the rest of the world and are less likely to have that "Americaaa! FUCK YEAH!" approach and cowboy mentality.


Less US intervention in the Middle East makes it harder to drum up support against "The Great Satan".

America actually condeming Israel's heavy handed tactics = harder to drum up support against "The Great Satan".

America working with the international community = easier to track down Al Quada do to intellegence sharing

Greater cooperation with allies = More operations like Afghanistan and less like Iraq

America no longer in Iraq denys them a breeding ground and live fire exercise, as well as makes it harder to drum up support against "The Great Satan".


These are all reasons why a democrat winning the next election would be bad for business in the eyes of terrorists.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush allowed an attack to happen through inaction IN ORDER to get McCain elected.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush allowed an attack to happen through inaction IN ORDER to get McCain elected.

he'd only do it if karl rove told him it was a good idea.

he'd only do it if karl rove told him it was a good idea.

Anyone can see it's a good idea for them.

Anyone can see it's a good idea for them.

bush isnt anyone.

Shameless Fear-mongering. Nothing more...

bush isnt anyone.

Rove, however, is.

Rove, however, is.

Didn't Rove resign? Or was I dreaming?

Didn't Rove resign? Or was I dreaming?

Machiavelli II resigned.

Reverse Psychology! McCain is smarter than we thought!!!:eek:... Either that or he's finally gone crazy:p

I agree and disagree. I dont think he should be making statements like that.

On the other hand it might be good politics.

Machiavelli II resigned.

Hey, that's uncalled for.

There's no evidence that Machiavelli actually thought that the world should be run the way he described.

This topic is already being discussed in the US election mega-thread (admittedly, because I locked Gauthier's thread on the same topic and advised him to go to the mega-thread). Anyway, it's a double-up.