Tom Baldwin in Washington
2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now
The Iraq war yesterday re-emerged as a central issue in the presidential race.
Hillary Clinton used an important foreign policy speech in Washington to attack Barack Obama, her rival for the Democratic nomination, and John McCain, the Republican nominee-elect, who is visiting Baghdad before the fifth anniversary of the invasion.
She said that Mr McCain wanted to extend President Bush’s “failed policy” and keep American troops fighting “another country’s civil war — a war we cannot win” — for 100 years.
Although she acknowledged that there had been a recent decrease in violence, Mrs Clinton said that last year’s “surge” in troop levels had been intended to give the Iraqis “time and space” for political reconciliation.
This had not been achieved, she declared, citing the continued absence of legislation on distributing oil revenues, basic services for citizens or a date for provincial elections.
“Let’s be clear: withdrawal is not defeat,” she said. “Defeat is keeping troops in Iraq for 100 years, defeat is straining our alliances and losing our standing in the world, defeat is draining our resources and diverting attention from our key interests.”
Mr McCain, who held talks yesterday with Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, said that Mrs Clinton “does not understand or appreciate the progress that has been made on the ground . . . the surge is working”.
He added: “This will be a big issue in the election as we approach November because at least a growing number of Americans . . . believe that this strategy has succeeded. That is in direct contradiction to the predictions made by the Democrats and particularly Senator Obama and Senator Clinton.”
Recent polls suggest that, while most voters still believe that the war was a mistake, a narrow majority now think that the US will ultimately prevail. The McCain campaign later dismissed Mrs Clinton’s claim about how long he wanted troops to remain as “intellectually dishonest”, saying that he envisaged the US providing military support in a “postwar scenario, not a hundred-year war”.
Mrs Clinton made no mention of her 2002 Senate vote authorising military action in Iraq. Instead, she scorned Mr Obama: “He didn’t start working aggressively to end the war until he started running for president,” she said, before highlighting remarks from Mr Obama’s foreign policy adviser that cast doubt on his plan to withdraw combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months. Mrs Clinton set out “concrete” plans to end the war. These include starting to bring troops home within 60 days of taking office — while maintaining counter-terrorism operations — holding the Iraqi Government to account for progress and enlisting the help of the international community to stabilise the country.
Yesterday Mr Obama, who plans his own policy address today on the issue of race and uniting the country, hit back at Mrs Clinton, saying that he would not allow her “to get away with saying this is just about speeches”.
He added that because of her 2002 vote “we have fought a war that has cost us thousands of lives and will cost us a trillion dollars”, saying: “It’s a war that should’ve never been authorised, and should’ve never been waged.”
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
Have you ever dreamed of owning your own racehorse or a beautiful painting?
Enjoy comfort, safety, space and great design. Plus enter our great competition
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Are you California dreaming? Explore the wonders of the Golden State. Also enter our fantastic competition
Do you have what it takes to be a Times photographer?
Your brain is capable of more than you might think...
Find out to make the most of your money with our wealth management guides
Need help with your property? We have an entire how to guide - buying, selling, letting, moving, to help you
We are seeking entries for the inaugural Sunday Times Best Green Companies Awards
Enjoy some wonderful inspiring wildlife moments
An interactive preview of the brand new For Your Eyes Only exhibition

Love Sudoku? Play our brand new interactive game: with added functionality and daily prizes

Are you irritable when you return from work? Drained of emotion? You could be suffering from boreout
Prepare for some shock and awe, petrol lovers. Despite the greens trying to wipe it out, the car is about to offer us the most exciting year ever
We've trawled the brochures and websites to find this summer’s best holidays for every taste and budget

Overseas contacts and local business information

Direct from the farms
2007/07
£57,500
South East England
2007/07
£40,995
South East England
2006/06
£41,995
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
£40-55k+benefits+uncapped commission
Morgan Keating
South East
Up to £30,000
GLE
London
£
c£75,000 + executive benefits
Morgan Keating
London and South
Unpaid with travel expenses
Network Rail
Globrix, the property search engine
Visit Times Online Property for homes for sale or rent
Residential development site with planning permission
£1,500,000
Mortgages, bank accounts & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Dinarobin Hotel Golf & Spa 7 nights
From £1830 per person – saving £530.
Walking & multi-activity holidays in Cauterets. Stylish self-catering apartments.
From 350€ for 7 nights.
SAVE 25% on Sandals Luxury Resorts
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property.
© Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Holding my nose I might even vote for Clinton so we get out of Iraq. Anyone who lived through the Viet Nam War era Should know the futility of trying to quash nationalist insurgencies with broad local popular support.
MARK KLEIN, M.D., Oakland, CALIFORNIA
My mum always said start what you finish. If they cut and run the Iraqis, and maybe the rest of us, are up the swanee. Where's that famous Clinton experience?
mount, dorset, GB
I cannot accept any of these statements from Sen. Clinton as anything more than self-serving political posturing. When her opinion counted most, she voted for the war.
JIm , Massapequa, NY
A very defeatist view. It looks to me as though there is some progress being made in Iraq right now. Surely madam Clinton would prefer leaving a stable country rather than running away now and leaving a vacuum to be filled by Iran and Syria?
The US ran away from Vietnam despite the fact that history has now shown they were close to vistory at several points. Of course each time it was domestic pressure from the likes of Clinton that allowed their enemy to regroup and defeat them.
Paul, Edinburgh, UK
The sad thing is that politicians on both sides of the Atlantic refuse to use language that an ordinary person can understand and relate to. terms like âintellectually dishonestâ and "envisaged the US providing military support in a âpostwar scenario" are grey at best. It is clear that the Alies are in for the long haul, so why not just say it. Unless ofcourse you are willing to commit to a set timetable for bringing ALL the troops home.
Hamad Lone, London, England