Obama's is a fool to play the national security game with McCain. If he thinks he can win on national security issue against McCain, he is a bigger idiot than I think he is. He should stick to his "Change" mantra and keep playing his race card, which is his only selling point. He is not running against Hillary anymore, who is no more than a second-rate hack (not that being second-rate has ever been a hindrance to getting the Dem nomination - see Mondale, Kerry, Gore, Muskie, McGovern, Dukakis - the illustrious list of Dem nominees past, where Obama is going to claim his rightful place.)

Obama is a much quicker study than McCain and can go toe to to with McCain on national security, already. And after all George W. of all people defeated McCain in their 2000 debates.

The situation is complicated in Iraq. It would behoove John McCain and some conservatives and even some main stream news commenters to read Juan Cole, but of course, they never will. "Ignorance is bliss".
Here is Cole, today:

Moreover, the allegation that he makes about there being 'al-Qaeda in Iraq' that could well take over the country is part lie and part insanity. The Sunni Arabs are no more than 20% of the Iraqi population. How could a tiny minority from within them take over the whole?

The technical definition of al-Qaeda is operatives who have sworn fealty to Usama bin Laden. There were only a few hundred of them. I doubt whether more than a handful of such individuals are in Iraq.

So there isn't any "al-Qaeda" in Iraq in the technical sense. There are "Excommunicating Holy Warriors" (Takfiri Jihadis), i.e. devotees of political Islam who are violent and willing to deploy terror for political purposes. They declare other Muslims who disagree with them "not Muslims,"-- thus the "excommunicating" bit. But there are only a few hundred foreign fighters. A small minority of Iraqis has associated with them. They don't call themselves 'al-Qaeda in Iraq.' The major such group is "The Islamic State of Iraq." And to say that they have "bases" in Iraq is pretty grandiose. They have some safe houses and try to take and hold neighborhoods, so far with indifferent success.

The idea that this small minority of violent Muslim fundamentalists could take over Iraq is completely crazy. They haven't even been able to keep their toehold in Baghdad-- the Sunnis have been largely ethnically cleansed from the capital by Shiite militias.

So the Shiites would not allow an "al-Qaeda" takeover of Iraq. Neither would the Kurds. Nor would most Sunni Arabs (as in al-Anbar Province, where the Dulaim tribe is at daggers drawn with the Excommunicating Holy Warriors).

Quoting a known anti-Semite to support another anti-Semite is not going to bolster your argument.

With Obama as the nominee, just keeping the Latino and Jewish votes within the Democratic party is going to be enough of a challenge.

Below is a taste of what is going to play out all over the country:

"McCain leads both Obama and Clinton in potential general-election match ups with either candidate in the all-important swing state of Florida, according to a Mason-Dixon poll out today (me: 2/28/2008).

McCain leads Obama 47%-37% and Clinton 49%-40%. The Arizona senator leads the Democrats across the board. About 80% of Republicans are behind McCain. Only 66% of Democrats are behind Obama and 72% are backing Clinton in one-one-one match-ups with McCain. Currently, 17% of Democrats indicate that in a match up with Obama, they'd support McCain; 16% say so in a match up with Clinton."

Most conservatives don't read Juan Cole because Juan Cole is an idiot. It's statements like these that show why...

The Sunni Arabs are no more than 20% of the Iraqi population. How could a tiny minority from within them take over the whole?

What a stupid question that conveniently forgets that Saddam Hussein was a Sunni and controlled the country for decades.

The idea that this small minority of violent Muslim fundamentalists could take over Iraq is completely crazy.

In fact, Saddam was a member of the Ba'ath party which was an even smaller group than the Sunnis. And how did the Ba'ath party take control? Why through a military coup in 1963.

The Iraqi Ba'ath party was formed in 1951, by 1954 they only had 500 members, yet within a decade they had taken control of both Iraq and Syria.

It wasn't like the Ba'athists did it by winning the popular vote, they did it by force. Just the kind of thing a small group of violent Muslim fundamentalists might try to do. Ah but that's just crazy!

What a stupid question that conveniently forgets that Saddam Hussein was a Sunni and controlled the country for decades.

Cole said a "tiny minority within a minority". If we assume that only about 1/4 of Iraq's Sunnis support al Qaeda (and it's probably less) that's still just 5% of the country's population. Somehow I don't see the Kurdish peshmerga and the Shiite militias who are backed by the US and Iran just wilting away in the face of a small band of foreign jihadists who call themselves al Qaeda.

Iraq is not now and never has been fertile ground for al Qaeda. Places like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan with large Sunni fundamentalist populations are where they are going to thrive.

We're not really in Iraq because of al Qaeda. As far as I can tell, the only reason we are there is that Bush fears an all-out Sunni-Shiite civil war if we leave. That's not an unreasonable fear. But the fear of an al Qaeda takeover of Iraq is unreasonable.

Marc, you ignore the fact there are many violent and well armed groups now in Iraq, most of them arrayed against al-Queda...I think it would better to let the Iraqis decide for themselves or fight it out if you will, amongst themselves. I'm confident that the Shiites would win this time, and as Obama says if the security situation warranted and al-Queda reemerged as a stronger force/ we could make that decision out of our national interest, to 'reengage them'. Just because Iraq is off the front pages, I wouldn't be overly optimistic about what is happening there now..

The Myth of the Surge

Hoping to turn enemies into allies, U.S. forces are arming Iraqis who fought with the insurgents. But it's already starting to backfire. A report from the front lines of the new Iraq...

The American forces responsible for overseeing "volunteer" militias have no illusions about their loyalty. "The only reason anything works or anybody deals with us is because we give them money,"

Now we have to bribe half the country, including many militias and quasi-terrorists with millions, indeed billions of hard earned taxpayer dollars, to prevent them from shooting at our soldiers. It sure was worth it.

The real issue is not just Iraq. McCain should actually be using the term , 'we are in it against the entire Islamofascist terror elements around the globe.' Obama has no plan for either Iraq, except to appease and surrender; no plan for Iran, Syria, Palestine. None as to dealing with Israel and its safety. He has no idea about Pakistan, Indonesia et al. McCain should be asking him how he will deal with all of that and , and ANOTHER ATTACK ON AMERICAN SOIL. Obama is simply a socialist pacifist and hasn't the foggiest idea how to protect OUR national security.

All we have done in Iraq is fighting a holding action. The underlying cause of the conflict which is the Sunni-Shiite rivalry is still there and there's been virtually zero progress on political reconciliation.

If anything the situation is worse now because our increased presence has taken the pressure off the factions to compromise with each other.

I believ most of those posting comments stating that AlQaeda would not be able to gain control of Iraq in the event the United States withdrew from Iraq suddwnly, have not served in Iraq. I have seen whole towns become under the control of a few terrorist. I guess your presumption is that a minoriy cannot conquer the mojority. Well, look at South Africa up until the 1990's or for that matter Syria, or even Iraq up until the invasion of 2003. Minorities gain power by terrorizing people not by asking for their votes. In Iraq one common tactic used by Al Qaeda is simply to cut the head of a few political leaders or anyone associated with the police. So please dn't be naive by questioning whether a minority can really gain control of Iraq.