Print Close The News & Observer
Published: Dec 02, 2006 12:00 AM
Modified: Dec 02, 2006 06:04 AM

McCain: More troops key to Iraq

Editor's note: Most political insiders think that Arizona Sen. John McCain is the front-runner in the Republican primary for president in 2008. McCain became a national figure after he was shot down in Vietnam and spent more than five years, much of it in pain and under torture, in a Communist prison. McCain, 70, was elected to the U.S House and later to the Senate and battled George W. Bush for the GOP presidential nomination in 2000.

McCain was in Charlotte and Winston-Salem on Friday. He met with Wachovia executives and helped U.S. Sen. Richard Burr raise $100,000 at a fundraiser at Wake Forest University.

Before the Burr event, McCain sat down with Rob Christensen of The News & Observer. This is one of a series of interviews The N&O is conducting with potential presidential candidates.

Q: President Bush has rejected the idea of a quick withdrawal from Iraq. What should be the U.S. policy in Iraq right now?

A: U.S. policy should be to send significantly increased troop presence in order to stabilize the deteriorating situation in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq including Anbar Province. We must clear and hold, not clear and leave. That requires additional troop strength. I am aware that is not a popular position. But the status quo in Iraq is steadily deteriorating. The military situation, in my view, cannot stand.

Q: Do you think the American people would support additional troops?

A: If they believed it would be successful. Americans are very ambivalent about this issue. If they simply wanted us out immediately, they would have never re-elected Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. It's a very liberal state, and he is a supporter of the war. They are very frustrated. Understandably so. Many of us who knew they needed more troops from the beginning watched this scenario and watched this train wreck. The consequences of failure in Iraq are chaos in Iraq and in the region. And I am convinced that, unlike the Vietnam War when we came home [and] it was over, if we left Iraq in disarray, it would follow us home."

Q: We keep hearing all these reports about the military being stretched so thin. Do we have the capability to send more troops to Iraq?

A: We needed a long time ago to increase the size of the Marine Corps and the Army by at least 100,000 -- 80,000 Army and 20,000 Marines. It would be a tremendous strain on the Guard and the Reserve as well as active duty forces. But nothing is compared to the consequences of a defeated Army. I saw a defeated Army once after we lost in Vietnam. It took us a long, long time to recover ..."

Q: How do you feel about a draft?

A: I don't think it's practical from a military standpoint. ... Politically, Americans would not accept it.

Practically, it takes a long, long time to train these men and women because of the sophistication of the technology associated with weapons systems. Finally, in my opinion, this is the finest military we have ever had, an all-volunteer force. So why would we want to go back to a draft? If I could say, with a little cynicism, if we went back to a draft, I think rich people would always be able to find a doctor to certify that they have a bad knee."

Q: Why did the midterm elections turn out so poorly for Republicans?

A: Frustration over the war in Iraq. Some pundits say that is the whole reason. ... The Republicans lost our way. We came in in '94 to change government and government changed us. We came to value power over principle. We presided over the greatest increase in spending since the Great Society. Of course, there was corruption, scandals that caused the independent vote to swing heavily Democratic."

Q: What do Republicans need to do retain the White House?

A: Go back to the principles of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. Restrain spending. Be honest in government. Recognize that the best government is the least government and that is closest to the people. Concentrate on family and community values. A strong national defense. The same principles that we advertise we need to put into practice. ...

Q: One of the things you have in common with Ronald Reagan is, you would be the oldest elected president. Do think that will be of concern to voters?

A: I'm sure that will be an issue. I've often said that I'm older than dirt and I have more scars than Frankenstein. I learned a few things along the way. My health is excellent and I will try to introduce everyone to my 94-year-old mother who just returned from driving herself around France. I put in 12-16 hour days. I work seven days a week. I do a lot of hiking and swimming. In August, my son, who is in the Naval Academy, and I hiked the Grand Canyon from rim to rim. I'd like to tell that I keep a very good diet, but that would be a lie. I was just eating cheese straws ...

Q: There has been a certain amount of skepticism about you from movement conservatives since your 2000 primary with George Bush and that was underscored by your campaign finance law. What do you have to say to conservatives that you are their kind of guy?

A: I'm a conservative, and I will stand on my record. I have a 24-year consistent pro-life voting record. I'm a fiscal conservative. I'm strong on national security. I'm not going to change. ... We live in very dangerous times. And we probably can't afford on-the-job training.

All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be published, broadcast or redistributed in any manner.

A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company