George Packer explains what Obama needs to say on Iraq:
Obama has shown, with his speech on race, that he has a talent for candor. One can imagine him speaking more honestly on Iraq. If pressed on his timetable for withdrawal, he could say, “That was always a goal, not a blueprint. When circumstances change, I don’t close my eyesI adapt.” He could detail in his speeches the functions that American troops and diplomats can continue to perform even as our primary combat role recedes: training and advising, counterterrorism, brokering deals among Iraqi factions, checking their expansionist impulses, opening talks with our enemies in the region. He could promise to negotiate all this with Iraqi leaders, emphasizing the difference between a relationship that respects the wishes of the public in both countries and one in which Iraqis are coerced into coöperation. If Obama truly wants to be seen as a figure of change, he needs to talk less about the past and more about the future: not the war that should never have been fought but the war that he, alone of the two candidates, can find an honorable way to end.
Added to this should be an absolute and clear statement that he, and he alone, favors removing all US troops in the medium run. Meanwhile, Ambers reports that McCain is going to press Obama on Iraq this week, "predicting that Obama will change his position" and trying to label him a flip-flopper.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.