You know, you go to the hospital for a colonoscopy yesterday, and you fall out of the loop on everything.

It’s certainly been an interesting time to be following politics, particularly on what to do in Iraq now that the surge has ended.  For several months, and indeed, for a long time before the surge began (whichever definition you subscribe to), John McCain has always maintained that setting a withdrawal deadline would be dangerous, and only embolden America’s enemies, who are surely waiting in the shadows for us to leave.  Barack Obama, meanwhile, says the troops should leave within 16 months of his becoming president.  He seems to have gotten some support on this plan from the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki.  You can see the volleyball game that went on last week here.

Well, it seems like the two plans have finally converged.

Via MSNBC (with a CNN interview), McCain was speaking with Wolf Blitzer yesterday.  Blitzer was asking him what would happen if Maliki and the Iraqi government insisted that the troops leave.  Although McCain insisted he won’t, because “…I know him very well.”  However, when Blitzer persisted, using Maliki’s support of 16 months, McCain seemed to suggest he also supported it:

BLITZER: So why do you think he said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?
MCCAIN: He said it’s a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it’s a pretty good timetable, as we should — or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground.

This wouldn’t be the first time he or his campaign suggested looking into a timetable might not be a bad idea.  A couple weeks ago, while the first round of this whole game was being played between Iraq and the U.S. on whether or not they supported a timetable, McCain’s top foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann said he’s not against timetables:

Senator McCain has always said that conditions on the ground — including the security threats posed by extremists and terrorists, and the ability of Iraqi forces to meet those threats — would be key determinants in U.S. force levels.

I think that after his return from overseas and visit with Gen. David Petraeus, we’ll start to hear some more rhetoric from Obama on any timetable following conditions on the ground.  However, as I stated in “The Withdrawal Game,” McCain has consistently had the lead on the “what-if” factor, where Obama has not.  I also don’t think making new plans should conditions change is a bad thing.

However, the problem for McCain is that should the “what-if” factor not apply, he’s essentially just lost his last key argument on the future of Iraq’s occupation.  It’s not been entirely unexpected, however.  I know others have made mention of this as well, but I follow Andrew Sullivan most, who’s been predicting such a convergence of viewpoints for months, and most recently made a prediction that the differences between their plans will be next to nothing by November.

So, what do McCain and Obama debate now?  McCain can try to say Obama is going to withdrawal no matter what the conditions on the ground are, but I think that’s distorting Obama’s true position, which he outlined an interview with Katie Couric a few days ago:

OBAMA: I will always listen to the commanders on the ground. And I will make an assessment based on the facts at that time. As I’ve said before … I am not interested in a false choice between either perfect inflexibility in which the next 16 months or the next two years I ignore anything that’s happening in Iraq. Or, alternatively, that I just have an open-ended, indefinite occupation of Iraq in which we’re not putting any pressure on the Iraqis to stand up and … take this burden on. What I’m gonna do is to set a vision of where we need to go, a clear and specific timeframe within which we’re gonna pull our combat forces out. But I am gonna continue to listen to the commanders on the ground as well as others who are gonna be working on diplomatic front, are gonna be dealing with the economy of Iraq, all of which are gonna contribute to the safety and security of the Iraqi people.

As I said above, I think this position will be strengthened once Obama comes home.  McCain could also try the old “he’s flip-flopped on withdrawaling based on conditions” but this can no longer be taken seriously as Obama could accuse McCain right back on flip-flopping on a timetable, and Obama would be right.

I suppose McCain and Obama could try and debate a future for Afghanistan now, except that Obama’s had the advantage on that for some time now.  McCain initally supported sending three additional brigades, but then rescinded those plans, and now favors involving more NATO troops.  Though I suppose he could change his mind again with his new remarks on Iraq.

Finally, McCain could question Obama’s judgement by continuing to bring up the surge as inidicative of his stronger foreign policy credentials, but again, Obama could just bring up McCain’s judgement on Iraq’s future now matching his own.

No, I think we’re just about to see the end of serious debate between the two nominees on foreign policy, at least in terms of Iraq and Afghanistan.  I predict that in the coming weeks, and especially once the conventions have ended, the sparring will transition primarily to domestic issues.

They’ve already done a little bit of this, especially in terms of gas prices, oil, and alternative energies.  I think Obama is going to find he’s rather weak here, since his support of ethanol will not go unnoticed.  Unless he changes his tune on the specific source of that ethanol, he’ll find a tough time with this issue.  However, McCain, with his emphasis on drilling offshore, won’t find the debate any easier.  On the electricity generation front, McCain may find his support of nuclear energy gains widespread acceptance, but he needs to be cautious where he talks about this.  For example, nuclear energy is probably not an issue to be talking about anywhere close to Nevada, where the Yucca Mountain storage facility is a huge issue.  In the end, I don’t think either candidate can yet claim a win in this area, because both have rather short sighted views on these issues. In my opinion, either candidate would be wise to take a cue from Newt Gringrich and leave no option off the table.

Yet, other than energy, domestic issues have not been a huge part of the overall debate on differences between McCain and Obama.  They’ve made their own, separate statements on several domestic issues, but both have really been focusing on foreign policy when it’s come time to outline their differences.  I guess that’s acceptable, since the majority of voters are not yet paying attention, but the time is coming where they will need to began outlining why their domestic plans are better.

Since, in the end, with the drawaldown of the Iraq war becoming imminent, and with the economic crisis stateside, I think that’s what most people will be expecting McCain and Obama to talk about.