Home > Election 2008, McCain Hall of Shame > McCain: I Meant the Surge Before the Surge™ which was Surgish Before We Surged™

McCain: I Meant the Surge Before the Surge™ which was Surgish Before We Surged™

July 25th, 2008

McCain’s flub about the Surge being responsible for the Anbar Awakening was bad enough, but wait until you hear his exquisitely contorted backpedaling on why he didn’t misspeak–it’s gotta be a prize-winner, for sure.

First of all, a surge is really a counterinsurgency strategy, and it’s made up of a number of components. And this counterinsurgency was initiated to some degree by Colonel McFarland in Anbar province relatively on his own. When I visited with him in December of 2006, he had already initiated that strategy in Ramadi by going in and clearing and holding in certain places. That is a counterinsurgency. And he told me at that time that he believed that that strategy, which is, quote, the surge, part of the surge, would be successful. So then, of course, it was very clear that we needed additional troops in order to carry out this counterinsurgency.

Prior to that, they had been going into places, killing people or not killing people, and then withdrawing. And the new counterinsurgency — surge — entailed clearing and holding, which Colonel McFarland had already started doing. And then of course later on there were additional troops, and General Petraeus has said that the surge would not have worked and the Anbar Awakening would not have taken place successfully if they hadn’t had an increase in the number of troops. So I’m not sure, frankly, that people really understand that a surge is part of a counterinsurgency strategy, which means going in, clearing, holding, building a better life, providing services to the people, and then clearly a part of that, an important part of it, was additional troops to help ensure the safety of the sheikhs, to regain control of Ramadi, which was a very bloody fight, and then the surge continued to succeed, and that counterinsurgency.

Got that? The Surge™ really happened months before we ever heard of it, executed by General McFarland, who confided this secret Surge™ to John McCain personally; the “Surge™” is not a “surge” in the number of soldiers, which is what everyone, including President Bush, has been saying it was, instead it was short for “counterinSURGEncy,” which one can only suppose we WEREN’T doing until late 2006, and it was this special McCain-McFarland McSurge™ which was responsible for everything coming up McRoses™.

If that ain’t the most twisted, frakked-up, sorry-ass excuse for a cover-your-ass rationale to explain off a huge gaffe, then I don’t know what is.

Well, there was McCain just a few days ago claiming that he knew what Maliki and the Iraqis wanted better than Maliki and the Iraqis, and that their repeated statements about endorsing Obama’s withdrawal plan was just confusion as McCain knew what they really wanted, which was what McCain has been pushing for, of course. Silly Iraqis.

There is just so much wrong with McCain’s Surge™ obfuscation that it’s not funny. He claims the surge helped in Anbar, when the counterinsurgency actions he described took place primarily in Baghdad, and claims that the Surge™ was what protected the sheiks who started the Anbar Awakening, though the sheik most responsible for starting the Awakening, Abu Risha, was assassinated at the height of the Surge™ (the Surge™ we all know about, not the surge before the Surge™).

American MSM’s reaction: we’ll have to see, but I am guessing it will be the same old usual “nothing to see here!”

Categories: Election 2008, McCain Hall of Shame Tags: by
  1. Tim Kane
    July 25th, 2008 at 05:33 | #1

    Actually, I didn’t think he had the cranium horse power to sting out that back peddling before he lost his place in his own story – so he’s got more on the ball than I was giving him credit for.

    In the mean time, if he wants to go all the way back, he can recall that General Shinseki originally recommended a surge of 400,000 men, which of course, promptly got him fired. To the extent any benefits have been accrued by the surge is an argument that Bush made a major mistake in not listening to his first general.

    As it turns out the surge was also instrumental in winning the battle of Yorktown. Without the surge, the United States might not had won its independence. That’s history, you can go look it up, on the internet – which should take you right back here.

  2. Bobbeh
    July 25th, 2008 at 10:39 | #2

    Oh I get it now, he was talking about “the surge” not “THE SURGE”


Comments are closed.