Early on, McCain criticized the Bush administration on such issues as the methods of attaining information from prisoners, immigration and the handling of the war in Iraq. This could have been a facade.
Now, President Bush has backed the maverick senator. It could be the other way around here. McCain may have found a new love for the President and his war policy.
One thing is certain, they are both banking on troop surge as the key to success in Iraq. They have come together, here, on this issue.
I estimate the war to be the leading issue in 2008. The future president of the United States will be the person who is able to lay out a real plan that takes into account the true challenges in Iraq. The plan must then rely on the insight, understanding and committment of every soldier, agent and contractor involved. The idea of chopping the roots of a tree as opposed to swatting the thousands of leaves cannot be an overstatement of how we, as Americans, have handled the war in Iraq so far. We, here in the states, took for granted the importance of Iraq which then led to the mishandling by some, less committed to freedom and democracy, on the ground.
As one American in Iraq put it, "The biggest problem here in Iraq is not the number of folks, but that many aren't doing anything. Many people have let the President down. If more troops means more of the same, it probably won't help."
No politician has even communicated the problem clearly. Yes, we have plans from presidential hopefuls such as Bidon and McCain, the "leading leaf swatters".
But what is the real answer for Iraq?
No one really knows.
In many cases, we have steered completely clear of international conflict allowing communism to take root. Later, we turn around a complain about trade deficits and unfair economic play.
When we have committed, to help another country to democracy, we have fallen short in that committment. We have spent billions of dollars, lost thousands of lives and then cut and run.
Mitt Romney, at least, starts with a true look at the problem. Before we get the infamous words, throw money and troops at the problem, we get an in depth analysis of the enemy and the challenge.
Instead of political bandwagon jumping we get a thoughtful position. Mitt backed the president, who returned little political advantage, because he had the best interest of America in mind.