The race for the presidency seems to be taking on a certain Name That Tune quality lately. You know, one candidate says that they can have the troops out in a year, another candidate says six months, the voters eventually say, "End That War!" Admittedly, John McCain isn't really playing as it's pretty easy to say that you can end a war in less than 100 years.
However, on the Democratic side, the Name That Tune-ishness of the thing is starting to strike me as kind of funny, especially since they're really saying the same thing. That's kind of what makes it weird that Hillary was attacking Obama on the issue recently.
Clinton calls for withdrawing troops within 60 days of becoming president, in consultation with military advisors. In other words, the 60 days is a best-case scenario but she'd still pay attention to what is actually happening in Iraq.
But while Obama - the cad - says that he'll get the troops out in 16 months, his advisors say that this estimate is a best-case scenario and will ultimately be determined by what is actually happening in Iraq.
So Hillary says that she's the only one who's actually going to get the troops out of Iraq and that Obama - the fool - is only going to do that if the situation in Iraq allows for it. But in the same speech she says that her own withdraw plan depends on the situation in Iraq allowing for it (hence the consultation with military advisors).
They're saying the same thing! And it's actually the right thing. Any plan to just yank troops out regardless of conditions is asking for trouble. Any plan has to be responsive to reality. In this case, both Hillary and Obama are doing that. It just doesn't make sense to me to attack each other for it.