George Bush has told us that he does not want permanent bases in Iraq, while simultaneously building multi-million dollar bases in Iraq. This past week we learned that Bush intends to have the bases become “Iraqi” bases, and the U.S. soldiers simply occupy the permanent bases as “tenants”.

John McCain obviously endorses this plan, and is spouting Bush rhetoric about why we need to stay in Iraq. This is about oil, clear and simple. George Bush and John McCain believe that America’s future is tied to maintaining a military presence in the Middle East so that we can preserve our access to oil.

This is placing him at odds with the soldiers and the military families who do not believe that their son, daughter, mother, or father should die for the sake of oil – defending America against aggressors, yes. Guaranteeing corporate oil profits, no.

As a postscript, it is significant that the Republicans blocked the windfall profits tax on oil companies proposal yesterday, along with blocking the removal of the ridiculous tax breaks for the oil industry.

The New York Times describes the reactions of the Obama campaign and Senator John Kerry to McCain’s statements (emphasis mine):

The presidential campaigns clashed Wednesday over strategy in Iraq as advisers to Senator Barack Obama seized on remarks by Senator John McCain to accuse him of being insensitive to the sacrifices being made by American soldiers.

In an interview on the NBC “Today” show, Mr. McCain was asked whether, if the troop escalation he had long advocated in Iraq was working, he had “a better estimate of when American forces can come home.”

“No, but that’s not too important,” Mr. McCain replied. He then went on to say, as he has many times, that the most important goal is reducing casualties in Iraq, and that American troops were still in South Korea, Japan and Germany without any fear of harm.

“We will be able to withdraw,” he said. “But the key to it is that we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way.”

Democrats leapt to criticize Mr. McCain for playing down the strains of the war. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, issued a statement calling Mr. McCain’s remark “a crystal clear indicator that he just doesn’t get the grave national security consequences of staying the course. Osama bin Laden is freely plotting attacks, our efforts in Afghanistan are undermanned, and our military readiness has been dangerously diminished.”

The Obama campaign jumped in with a conference call for reporters, with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic Party’s nominee in 2004, and two Obama foreign policy advisers.

“It is unbelievably out of touch with the needs and concerns of Americans, particularly of the families of the troops that are over there,” Mr. Kerry said. “To them it is the most important thing in the world.”

Mr. Kerry, who considered having Mr. McCain as his vice-presidential nominee in 2004, said that military officials had said that they could not sustain the troop levels in Iraq and that the demands of that war had left the United States unable to react to other crises or meet the needs of the war in Afghanistan.

The Obama advisers argued that Mr. McCain has several times seemed “confused” about the situation in Iraq, noting that he has confused Sunnis for Shiites and incorrectly identified whom Iran was supporting.

“On critical, factual questions that are fundamental to understanding what is going on in Iraq and the region, Senator McCain has gotten it wrong and not just once but repeatedly,” said Susan Rice, a former assistant secretary of state.

Democrats Criticize McCain on Strategy in Iraq - NYTimes.com.