McCain expresses concern over Iraq-Pakistan border — which doesn’t exist

Remember, the entire premise of John McCain’s campaign pitch is that he has an unrivaled expertise in foreign policy.

For those of you who can’t watch clips online, McCain appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” a few hours ago, and Diane Sawyer asked if he believed “the situation in Afghanistan is precarious and urgent.” McCain, carefully avoiding Sawyer’s adjectives, responded, “It’s a serious situation, but there’s a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I’m afraid that it’s a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border.”

And in apparent attempt to win the electoral votes of Schmuck Town, McCain added, “And I would not announce that I’m going to attack Pakistan, as Sen. Obama did when he was during [sic] his campaign.”

Watching McCain humiliate himself like this is just painful. For one thing, Iraq and Pakistan don’t share a border. They’re not even especially close — Iraq and Pakistan are separated by 1,500 miles and the country of Iran.

For another, Obama did not “announce” that he’s going to “attack” Pakistan. Obama said he would authorize pursuit against high-value terrorist targets if targets slipped into areas of Pakistan where Musharraf has limited control. If John McCain seriously wants to tell voters that he would not pursue terrorists in this area, perhaps he should stop lying and start acknowledging the weakness of his counter-terrorism policy.

Regardless, the comments reflect a larger problem for McCain and his surprisingly incoherent perspective on the basics of foreign policy.



Look, I know it’s easy to make a mistake on live, national television. But Diane Sawyer had just asked about Afghanistan when McCain started talking about the Iraq-Pakistan border. Indeed, in context, it seemed as if McCain was so anxious to falsely attack Obama on U.S. policy towards Pakistan that he changed subjects in mid-sentence, leading to a gaffe that didn’t make any sense at all.

And if McCain were generally coherent on matters of foreign policy, it’d be easier to overlook minor errors like talking about borders that don’t exist. But the real problem here is that McCain’s constant confusion seems to be part of a pattern.

* McCain continues to believe Czechoslovakia is still a country.

* McCain has been confused about the difference between Sudan and Somalia.

* McCain has been confused about whether he wants more U.S. troops in Afghanistan, more NATO troops in Afghanistan, or both.

* McCain has been confused about how many U.S. troops are in Iraq.

* McCain has been confused about whether the U.S. can maintain a long-term presence in Iraq.

* McCain has been confused about the source of violence in Iraq.

* McCain has been confused about Iran’s relationship with al Qaeda.

* McCain has been confused about the difference between Sunni and Shi’ia.

* McCain has been confused about Gen. Petraeus’ responsibilities in Iraq.

* McCain has been confused about what transpired during the Maliki government’s recent offensive in Basra.

* McCain has been confused about Gen. Petraeus’ ability to travel around Baghdad “in a non-armed Humvee.”

* McCain has been so confused about Iraq, in November 2006, he couldn’t even do a live interview about the war without reading prepared notes on national television.

* McCain has been confused about his vote on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

* McCain, following a trip to Germany, referred to “President Putin of Germany.” (Updated)

And this only covers McCain’s obvious incoherence on his signature issue.

I honestly don’t know what happened to this guy. John McCain used to be a sharp, reasonably honest politician. And then he decided he desperately wanted to be the Republican presidential nominee — and he threw it all away.

Maybe it’ll work out. Maybe just enough voters will be fooled by McCain’s bizarre con job. But it’s hard to imagine how.