Barack Obama, Iraqi leader Nouri Maliki appear to be on the same page

John McCain's campaign could not have seen this coming -- the presumptive Republican presidential nominee forced on the defensive by, of all people, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki.

Much as McCain and his staff wanted to hammer home their view that Barack Obama is clueless about Iraq, Maliki seemingly gave the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee a big dose of credibility when word surfaced over the weekend that, as quoted by the German magazine Der Spiegel, he said he would like to see U.S. troops leave his country "as soon as possible."

Maliki, Der Spiegel reported, went on to say: "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.”

Maliki's office, suddenly finding him thrust smack in the middle of the U.S. campaign, issued a somewhat half-hearted demurral, insisting something got lost in the translation of what he said.

But an audio recording of his comment, vetted by the New York Times, showed that Der Spiegel essentially got it right. And in the initial readout from Obama's visit today with Maliki in Baghdad, the Associated Press reported that the Iraqi government would like to see American combat units gone at some point in 2010 -- a timeframe, the story noted, that "falls within the 16-month withdrawal plan proposed by Obama." [UPDATE: The L.A. Times has the story, as well.]

McCain, during a round-robin set of appearances this morning on the major morning talk shows, did his best to try to change the subject by focusing on how wrong, in his view, Obama was for opposing the U.S. troop surge in Iraq last year, which has been widely credited with restoring a semblance of security there.

On ABC's "Good Morning America," for instance, McCain chided Obama for a "fundamental misjudgment" on the surge. And on NBC’s “Today” show, he said his rival "badly misjudged" what was needed in Iraq.

McCain, though, did not escape unscathed during his interview sessions. In a verbal flub that will spark renewed recollections of his Shiite/Sunni miscue earlier this year while he was visiting the Middle East, he erroneously reconfigured the map of the world.

Asked on ABC about the uptick in violence by Islamic extremists in Afghanistan, he replied: "We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border."

Iraq borders several nations, but Pakistan is not among them -- looming between the two is Iran. (Pakistan's neighbors, however, include Afghanistan).

The Note, ABC's daily political summary, opined that by "appearing to confuse Iraq and Afghanistan" McCain ended up committing "the first big gaffe" since Obama embarked on his overseas trip amid much speculation about mistakes he might make.

-- Don Frederick

Photo credit: AFP / Getty Images

Comments

[Hector Maquieira]

You say Mccain misspoke, but he never corrected himself. I mean, fine, he's very old I don't expect him to know every border in the world, but I also don't expect him to be a good president... Anyways, Mccain's not a bad guy, it's just that Obama is clearly the superior candidate, going to Iraq and showing that he knows what he talks about.

[jon]

Chris - - you'd be making a good point, if those on your side, didn't inflate the same types of mistakes, when Obama has made them.
How many times, I have to read from the Right, how Obama doesn't know there are 50 States. Why, because he mis-spoke one time, saying something about 57 States.
The thing about what McCain said, though, seems to be a McCain pattern, as far as Geography, History, etc.
He didn't know the difference between Shia & Sunni Muslims (this he demonstrated several times).
He's mentioned Czechoslovakia several times, which hasn't existed, in a decade & a half.
And now, thinking that Iraq & Pakistan share a border.
Luckily for you, as a McCainer, this will blow over, since the media chooses not to scrutinize Senator McCain.
Had Obama said this, it would be 24/7, how Obama knows nothing about Geography.

[Truth]

It isn't about his poor geographical skills, its the fact that he's old and senile, and no longer retains a youthful ability to speak english. His "mis-speaks" account for his failing aged mind, and regardless if he actually knows Iraq doesn't border Afganistan, he can't say it, do you really want someone like that with his finger on the button?
Not me

[Lexington]

Sorry Chris, this is more than just 'misspeaking'. Even if we give McCain the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he meant 'Iran' when he said 'Iraq', he would still be way off the mark. After all, the Iran / Pakistan border area isn't where the real trouble it.

For that, you have to look to the tribal areas in the north of Pakistan, along the border with Afghanistan, in the vicinity of Tora Bora - several hundred very rocky miles from the Iranian border.

Face it - the guy is only three months away from the election, and is still on the very steep part of the learning curve. Not encouraging. And this is coming from a Republican. I just hope he picks a VP who knows basic geography.

[Jake]

The problem with this one simple mistake is that it is happening over and over again and every time it does McCain gets a pass on it. I guess Lieberman was not there to save him this time. Factor that in with McCain's penchant for changing direction on positions more often than the wind changes direction, his penchant for claiming credit for bills like Webb's GI Bill that he actually opposed, and his flip flop on equal pay for women he made in Michigan recently when he actually voted against a bill that would have made this issue a reality. Then you take the fact he has no economic plan, gimmicks for an energy plan, a healthcare plan that will actually increase our taxes and expenditures on health care, and views on torture and other issues that do not sit well with most folks once they find out where McCain actually stands on them and you would think that would leave most of us not wanting anything to do with McCain. But of course I do not speak for anyone but myself.

[Lexington]

Sorry Chris, this is more than just 'misspeaking'. Even if we give McCain the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he meant 'Iran' when he said 'Iraq', he would still be way off the mark. After all, the Iran / Pakistan border area isn't where the real trouble it.

For that, you have to look to the tribal areas in the north of Pakistan, along the border with Afghanistan, in the vicinity of Tora Bora - several hundred very rocky miles from the Iranian border.

Face it - the guy is only three months away from the election, and is still on the very steep part of the learning curve. Not encouraging. And this is coming from a Republican. I just hope he picks a VP who knows basic geography.

[Che]

I have to say to Obama, WOW, pretty slick politiking. He's definitely redefined POTUS campaining. The most attention grabbing move ever, in a time when campaigns traditionally take a lull in the public's eye. Whether he wins or loses, no one will forget his approach. Now if he can get back from the Middle East alive, this will be very interesting. But I have this creepy feeling someone in the Bush/Cheney military-industrial complex (MIC) is going to take the opportunity to blow him or his plane up. That's why he first went to Afghanistan and threw them a bone about troop build up there while pulling out of Iraq. All MIC cares about is, "Where's my money?!? I said, where's my money? You better have my money!" His trip took guts, BALLS, man. I don't particularly care for either Obama or McCain (nor Clinton - yuck!) but I have to admire Barack's campaign machine. Slick Willy Clinton has NOTHING compared to Baracky Baby!

[kjjack]

Are you kidding? He says "That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.”, and that's supposed to mean he supports him?
Just like Obama, that is an empty statement. It's like saying "I want to do it in 16 months, but if it takes longer, then it will take longer, but for now, I'll say 16 months"

Jeez!!!

[EMMANUEL UDOMI]

It is noted that little mistakes do take place especially in such politica arena, this is fogiveable. However, that Obama has the will and understanding to make an early withdrawal of American troops in Iraqi soil as fast as within 24 months is no mare speculation, but a reality.
What it takes is the will, audacity, the charisma,political engineering that looks towards national healing, understanding and group unification. Obama, can bring about this and Americans are aware of this.
People should look beyond the Democratic and Republican set up and divides and begin to look for who is able to deliver the goodies and save American and the world in general the shame that America is currently facing in the world geopolitical setting.

[Dan Lee]

We can figure out what McCain means, the same as we can sort of figure out what Bush is trying to say. But maybe it would be a good idea to elect somebody who didn't graduate at the bottom of his class for a change. McCain isn't the problem. I like him personally just fine. The problem is that he would be as dependent as is Bush on people who represent only about thirty percent of the population. That is the thirty percent who always go for the most authoritarian leadership available. We could do without four more years of the Dr. Strangelove mentality we've been living under.

[hinnis]

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF MEDIA BIAS:

BERNARD GOLDBERG, FOX NEWS ANALYST: If we needed any more proof, Bill, that the networks were on the Barack Obama campaign team, this is it. They're covering this upcoming trip as if he were already president. By sending their anchors, they're also sending a not so subtle message to their audience. And the message is this trip is important, because we don't send our anchors unless the trip is important, right? And they're also saying it's a lot more important than the trip to the Middle East that John McCain made because John McCain, as far as a lot of the mainstream media is concerned, is just another run-of-the-mill, white politician. And Barack Obama is anything but that.

[Vijay]

99.9% of the media is in thrall to Obama - an egotistical, shifty, manipulative, ingrate. If McCain does win - and that is not a 4 SD event - all these Obamesiah maniacs will probably threaten to emigrate to Canada just as they did when Gore and then Kerry lost. Of course, they are all still here and still will be under President McCain

[thebob.bob]

Declare victory and leave. Then let's get back the money stolen by the Bush Crime Family and their friends.

[Deanna Taylor]

It is not a simple mistake, but a simple man...We cannot afford to have someone leading out country who reveals such ignorance. This is not the first time that he has revealed his lack of knowledge. The only thing more disgusting than his words was the obnoxous phoney smile he wore during the interview. McCain is a dinasor, the real problem is if elected we all could become extinct!!!!

[Khyber Jones]

The title of the article is wrong. There was nothing inadvertant about what Maliki said. He has been hinting at an end date for the US troop presence for the past 4 months. This was an intentional attempt to put some distance between him and Bush on the timetable issue in a way that would be covered widely by the US and international media.

The reason is simple: Maliki lost confidence in the surge strategy because it did not work to control Moqtada Al-Sadr. In March, the Iraqi Army launched an offensive against Al-Sadr and met with significant resistance, requiring US troops to come to Maliki's aid. Sadr was so effective and defending himself that Maliki had to send emissaries to Sadr to beg him to put down his weapons and return to the status quo ante. It is no accident that since that incident, Maliki has aligned himself with Sadr on the issue of ending the US occupation of Iraq. In short, Maliki believed the surge did not work, and he is now looking to a different option.

[Dan]

Obviously Don Frederick also needs a geography lesson. He states "Iraq borders several nations, but Pakistan is not among them -- looming between the two is Iran. (Pakistan's neighbors, however, include Afghanistan)." Mr Frederick, also "looming" between the two is Afghanistan. Get it? Iraq - Iran-Afghanistan-THEN Pakistan. Go back to your National Geographic Don. Stop making an idiot of yourself AND the LA Times.

[Good]

"But an audio recording of his comment, vetted by the New Times, showed that Der Spiegel essentially got it right."

Yes, if by "essentially" you mean shut the hell up you are lying. Der Spiegel had Maliki saying Obama's plan was "right" but then New York Times found that Maliki only said that Obama's plan might work out in the end. Whatever. It has begun, the media is propping Obama up on his throne.

"the Iraqi government would like to see American combat units gone at some point in 2010 -- a timeframe, the story noted, that "falls within the 16-month withdrawal plan proposed by Obama.""

Yes, it does. However, the Iraqis are flexible as to what happens, warranted by conditions on the ground. Obama's plan is not. The Chosen One has no clothes.

[captbilly]

What did you think the Iraqi Prime Minister would say? He is obviously a left wing liberal, probably a terrorist (after all he is from the country where all the 9/11 conspirators came from), and he lives in the country that had all those WMDs. We are in Iraq to help those dumb Iraqis realize that what they want is American soldiers in thier country for as long as we feel that the surge is working. It is clear that those two Muslim extremists (I talking Obama and Al Maliki) have some secret deal going on to take over the world.

Look we all know that McCain is more knowledgeable about world affairs and especially military/security issues, than Obama is. I have been hearing the media for months now telling me that McCain is the security and world affairs guy, so if McCain says the surge is working and we are winning in Iraq, who is Al Maliki to tell us McCain is wrong. If Iraqis were able to run a country then we wouldn't have had to have gone into Iraq and bust up the place and "shock and Awe" them into giving us free reign over the place. Just imagine how thankful America would be if we weren't able to run our country properly and so the Chinese or Russians came in and helped us out by destroying our infrastructure and allowing us to start over with a clean slate. The world needs to get on board with McCain and Bush, and realize that America is clearly the smartest country on earth and best able to decide for other people how they should live.

[greg]

"Wonderful. I wonder how the republicans will play this..."

They'll just blame the media. They should be glad McCain's not getting the attention Obama is. His many embarrassing gaffes would only get more publicity.

Sunni-Shiite mistake?
Czechoslovakia?
Iraq-Pakistan border?

All of these from a foreign affairs "expert"? And they are NOT simple slips, he repeated these claims on several occasions. If Obama said anything close to this sort of gaffe you'd never hear the end of it...

[hinnis]

Most Believe Reporters Are Trying To Help Obama Win:

POSTED July 21, 1:06 PM

A new Rasmussen poll finds 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help Obama with their coverage. Only 14% believe most reporters will try to help John McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage. There is of course a partisan divide:

A plurality of Democrats—37%-- say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of the campaign. Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe most reporters are trying to help Obama and 21% in Obama’s party think reporters are trying to help McCain.

Among Republicans, 78% believe reporters are trying to help Obama and 10% see most offering unbiased coverage.

As for unaffiliated voters, 50% see a pro-Obama bias and 21% see unbiased coverage. Just 12% of those not affiliated with either major party believe the reporters are trying to help McCain.

When Senator McCain traveled to Europe and the Middle East after clinching the Republican nomination, he got scant media coverage. Compare that to the orgy of media coverage for Obama's trip.

Obama's trip is the latest example of a continuing pattern that puts McCain at a disadvantage:

Since June 9th, when Obama effectively clinched the votes for the nomination, the Project For Excellence In Journalism took a weekly look at 300 political stories in newspapers, magazines and television. In 77 percent of the stories, Obama played an important role, and 51 percent featured McCain.

"That's an edge," said Rosenthiel. "That is a big enough difference that it is an uneven playing field probably for McCain."

And there is more to come. As Obama continues his foreign travels to the Middle East and Europe, he will be interviewed by all three network anchors - CBS' Katie Couric on Tuesday, ABC's Charles Gibson on Wednesday and NBC's Brian Williams on Thursday.

The media even admits suffering from Obamamania.

[scott]

ah crhis, your typical divisive BS reply to a factual account just shows what a sinking ship your on. we've had eight years of someone who according to you probably only 'mispoke' at every major event or speech he gave right ? the pretty clear picture emerging here isn't along party lines, its simply that mccain is rather clueless about the sitaution and apparently even the location of Iraq.

[Jim]

Even if McCain botched the Pakistani/Iraq border comment, I am fairly certain he knows the US does not have 57 states like Barack Hussein Obama does!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

[John Drew]

This dude is old – no offense. I am 34 year old and I am not as sharp as I used to be when I was in my 2o’s let alone when you are in 70’s.

[Mitchell in NY]

Maliki has been trying to maneuver around McBush's desire to keep American troops stationed indefinitely in Iraq for quite some time. This was a clever move on his part. No accident, even if his words got out in front of him.

But on another front, I don't think people are aware of the forces that are lining up behind Obama. I have heard that the Federation may be the latest.

"Obama, Spock, and the New Star Trek Nation"
http://msa4.wordpress.com/

[Zahdio]

Barack has a personality people like. People like his ideas and like to listen to him. Nouri Maliki obviously liked what he saw and heard. Now we may be able to get some positive response from world leaders. People prefer peace to war. Is that difficult to understand?