Tuesday, September 04, 2007

MITT ROMNEY

Is Romney's "Iraq Is a Mess" Comment Really Much of a Shift?

Romney's comment that "Iraq is a mess" is getting a lot of attention (Drudge, RCP, AmSpec), with some asking whether the "less measured" language is a sign of a pivot on Iraq. I don't think it's much more than a stray comment aimed at establishing a bond with a questioner. If you listen to the rest of Romney's answer, it's pretty much standard-issue fare for Republicans on Iraq at this point:

Well, first of all, it is a mess. So when you've got a mess, there's no easy, good answer. Alright? The easy, good answer, is to turn the clock back and do some things differently a long time ago. And I'll acknowledge that. And admit that. and we'll try and stand up and hey say everything that's been done in Washington has been done perfectly. I wouldn't agree with that statement. And so we are where we are. What do you do now?

Well, one thing we can do is say, 'you know what, lets just pull out, let's just get out in a hurry, get all of our equipment out as fast as we can, bring everybody home.' The problem with that answer is that it adds a certain degree of risk of something we haven't given a lot of thought to, or some people haven't, and if we get out too quickly, and we don't have any stability left as a result of pulling out abruptly, we could ignite not only a massive civil war within Iraq — we already have a civil war, but a massive civil war —we could also ignite that throughout the region.

And we could have Iran, Saudi Arabia, even Israel, others being affected. We could have the Iranians grab the Shia south, and we could have al-Qaeda play a more dominant role among the Sunnis — the Sunni tribal uh, chiefs have been, as you know, sheiks have been working with our military and we've seen some progress getting al-Qaeda out of the Sunnis. We have a potential destablization of the border with Turkey if the Kurds became interested in creating a Kurdistan. So there are some regional consequences that could be pretty significant.

And so in my view, I don't want to take that course if there's another course that's available. And there is. And the course that I think has a reasonable probability of success today is one which begins with the surge, which we're seeing now, is followed by phase two, which is a support role, where our troops are no longer in the front. But instead they're providing support — air support, intelligence support, logistical support — but we're in a support role, with far fewer troops, and in a support role. And then we're going to move to the third phase, which is standby. Where our troops are out of Iraq and in surrounding nations, like Kuwait and Qatar, where we're available if we're absolutely needed, but basically the country is on its own. I see those three phases. I see them happening relatively soon.

I think that sometime in 08, by virtue of the success of the surge, we're going to be able to move to the support role. I certainly hope so. And of course, there's all sorts ofother possibilities. We'll do our best to see what kind of success we're having at each stage, but those are the three phases... Surge, Support, then standby. And bring our guys home as soon as we can without igniting a regional conflict which can have devastating conseequences to the people there as well as for the entire world.

Is there anything in that comment that we wouldn't hear from the other GOP candidates?

09/04 01:14 PMShare