Obama's Iraq pullout gains ally: Iraq

I guess Ms. Sly wanted to save time by just handing out the Obama press release as "news".

Link most journalists, Sly does not seem to understand the difference between plans and commitments.

Planning to leave by a certain date is all well and good, but that plan is based on achieving an objective, in this case the elimination of the terrorist threat to Iraq. If there is a delay in achieving that objective, plans are rearranged.

Obama has his own objective: leave Iraq come hell or high water.

Obama wants to get out no matter what. Iranian troops could be attacking Basra, and Obama would leave. Iran could be dropping nukes on Baghdad and Obama would run. That's what Liberals do: they leave allies when threatened and let millions die and then say they can do nothing.

And of course, this is exactly what Sly and other journalists love to see. And she is doing a excellent job promoting it.

I'm sure there will be some people who bash Obama over this in some way. However, everyone has to admit that Obama has a rare combination of intelligence and solid intuition - along with making people believe he is sincere. (I happen to think Obama truly has the country's best interest in the forefront of all of his policies - whether you agree with them or not.)

He's been right about quite a bit during his "short" stint in the Senate (not including FISA, but no one's perfect!)

The current White House is a total embarrassment. Maybe Iraq is going public now because Bush & Co. has pissed them off with their "withdrawal horizon" nonsense. Does anyone think that Bush can even negotiate in good faith at this point? (BTW - the "surge" "worked" because we have been paying people not to fight...this administration is desperate. End this thing NOW!)

Americans want out of Iraq. As of right now, the Iraqis want us out. So let's make it happen!

A) we wouldn't even have comments like "withdrawl by..." if it weren't for McCain. Obama is riding the coattails of McCain's leadership. Remember, Obama said the surge would make things worse. Who's judgement is off now Barack? B) The Iraqi gov't says there share teh goal, but their plan is dependent on the situation on the ground which is vastly different that Obama's arbitrary 16 months.

Way to go, Barack!! We never should have started that war to begin with. We took our eye off the ball completely in Afganistan, letting the Taliban and al-qaeda come right back. That Moron McCain is still barking that SURGE crap. If the war had been managed CORRECTLY FROM THE BEGINNING WITH ENOUGH TROOPS, THE "SURGE" WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NECESSARY. What did it take, NEARLY FOUR YEARS FOR THESE REPUBLICAN FOOLS TO FIGURE OUT WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TROOPS ON THE GROUND? We had no plan, just letting our troops drive around in $115,000 Humvees to get blown up by roadside bombs. IF YOU ARE GOING TO WAR, THEN GO WITH ALL YOU GOT!! The Iraq war was fought like sissies LED BY sissies. Hell yeah, get them out of there. McCain has to be moron to want to continue with Bush's strategy, or lack thereof. All the Republicans are doing is making money for their "partners"--the CONTRACTORS. The only office a Republican should run for now is the BORDER.

The above Liz Sly promotion piece for Obama doesn't even merit a response. "Dan" does a great job fisking how Sly twists what the Iraqis actually said into an endorsement of Obama.

No wonder the latest Rasmussen poll shows the American people believe the media is merely an Obama cheerleading squad.

As to the Obama "Tour de Farce", the Times of London has a great take you won't ever see in the Tribune or other Obama Campaign website, headlined "Iraqis underwhelmed by media circus for Barack Obama visit." See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4375264.ece
for the complete article.

Because the USA is seen as such a global politcal monster and the world has the ability to identify and follow the political shenanigans (corruption and ignorance), thanks to the age of instant information - misinformation through the internet, here we have the Iraqi Prime Minister playing US presidential candidates against each other as well as our sitting president. Isn't global politics a wonderful thing? Barry wants the world to notice his rise to stardom and by God, he's going to make sure they do and in the process unfortunately creates these kinds of situations. Don't you think Maliki is playing this situation to his advantage? Of course he is and the freshman Obama, who doesn't know what he's doing, gives Maliki the opportunity to use leverage that wasn't there before. Now the Golden Boy will return home and claim to have solved thid issue even though he's really done nothing, maybe worsened in the big picture. Only time will tell but I'm not impressed.

The debate centers around confusion about what our objectives are in Iraq. Obama's objectives are known. McCain's are not because all he has are platitudes and campaign slogans. "Victory and honor" sound nice but that is not a political or military objective.

Our goals were to depose Saddam and stabilize the country long enough for a new Iraqi government to take over. Guess what? We are near that point now and it is no surprise the Iraqis see this and are asking us to make our plans to leave. We have victory already and I think McCain is lying to us and our military by conflating an Iraq exit with "surrender".

"Eliminating the terrorist threat in Iraq" only exists in the minds of people who were dumb enough to support the Iraq invasion on Bush's flimsy "evidence". We will never eliminate it completely in Iraq but if we want to we had better take the fight to where the threat is most serious: Afghanistan-Pakistan.

It's time to let the Iraqis have their country back. Even Bush now agrees with that. Obama has been leading on foreign policy and that is driving Bush and McCain nuts.

"President of the World" Nobama has the corrupt Maliki puppet government on his side. Swell. That is certainly a feather in his pointed little hat. He could not even find Iraq until Mr. McCain shamed him into going and now he and Maliki are BFF's? As the mother of an air guardsman who has recently returned from Iraq and is now facing a tour in Afghanistan just 4 months after returning I do not believe that McCain's idea of being over there for 50 years is a good idea, but in turn, I do not believe that Nobama's - I don't have a plan, but let's bring them home strategy is any better. We went into this war without a plan only to experience disasterous consequences, I do not think that trying to bring home the troops from Iraq without a plan will work any better. And just how does a two day whirlwind tour "BURNISH" his foreign policy credentials? How does flying around for two days really give him any idea of what is going on over there? This trip and his plans to deliver campaign speeches in Europe is nothing but a calculated show, much like all his other actions. So far he has changed positions on his withdrawal of troops from IRAQ, FISA, GUN CONTROL, etc. abandoning the liberals that got him to this point and is now edging toward the center. This guy will promise anyone anything to get elected. Anyone can do that. It is what he will ACTUALLY do if he is elected that concerns me and based on his performance as a senator in Illinois and his performance in Washington as a senator, I would say that he will follow the Blago mold of perpetual campaigning with very little actual substantive change. At this point, I can honestly say that there is NO presidential candidate that actually represents the agenda and policies I would like to see advanced by the next president.

I think that the question of WHEN we leave, is like trying to predict the weather a couple of years from now. If anything, with the wheather you at least have a pretty good idea of the seasons.....there is nothing to tell us what will occur that far in advance. Obama is trying so hard to be RIGHT about it, but it's absolutely no different than what McCain has said, it depends on how things go. You cannot put a time-line on WAR. Some people get that, and some do not!

He caught some heat in the media for meddling. THAT was soooooo accurate. I keep thinking, oh gosh, please shut up.

One more thing to prove we didn't go to help the Iraqis, just a little pay back and oil.

There's no lie they won't tell, no headline they won't mislead with to help their messiah.
Dabbagh cautioned, however, that any timetable should be flexible enough to accommodate changing conditions, "to ensure that we won't be attacked by any enemy inside or outside Iraq."

Bill- all those people complaining we went over there to get OIL are the exact same group that don't want to drill for our own oil and take that completely out of the equation. I guess it's like so many Dem beliefs, without victims where would the party be.

So tell me Teresa....If the Iraqis want us to leave 2010...and you want to stay till.....whenever....how is this for the Iraqi people? I guess like here at home...the republicans know better than the American and Iraqi people.

I guess it's like so many Dem beliefs, without victims where would the party be.
Posted by: Teresa | July 22, 2008 11:50 AM

Victimization - it's a condition of permanency. NO ONE moves forward. Ever. That is more than half of their base.
*****

There's no lie they won't tell, no headline they won't mislead with to help their messiah.
Posted by: Jeff | July 22, 2008 11:30 AM

Somehow though, they left out the part where the great Obama is flying General Petraeus around in this here helicopter, as he advises Gen. Petraeus on what he now should be directing his attention towards.

This is just undeniably great stuff for the swooning masses. They got needs to be fulfilled.

Bill, see Dan's post about plans and commitments. There's a huge difference.

Maliki can no more give a certain deadline for us to leave, then Obama can. So, what are you saying, hey 2010 is here> LEAVE. You cannot give a dead line in WAR. It might be the next year who knows. It's odd to me that hearing 2010 makes YOU feel better. That's absurd. It's not an exact science.

No one had to fight wars like this in years past. The media and their desire for immediate answers seem to go along with the change in society itself, everyone wants everything here and now, no one has patience for anything.

Maybe it's just a generational thing. I would rather someone tell me straight that make me feel good.

Bill, see Dan's post about plans and commitments. There's a huge difference.

Posted by: Jeff | July 22, 2008 12:42 PM

McBushs judgement is that if he had to start the Iraq war all over again....He would. He has said this many times. If you want to use conditions on the ground...who would know better than the Iraqi people.

"President of the World" Nobama has the corrupt Maliki puppet government on his side. Swell.
Posted by: Sweet Polly Purebred | July 22, 2008 10:00 AM

Hey wait...isn't this supposedly the democratically elected government of Iraq that our soldiers died for? If they want us out of their country, then we should definitely take full advantage of that and get the heck out. The British had the sense to realistically assess the 'condition on the ground' and they got out.

Teresa, WHY can't Maliki give a deadline? It's his country, right? And this is not a war, it's an occupation. If you like occupying this country so much, then sign up and do the job yourself. And, oh yes, donate your entire paycheck to help pay for it. I think Obama's right on this. If the Iraqis know that their free police service will be leaving in a couple months, then they will be much more motivated to get themselves pulled together. It's been five years too long.

No one had to fight wars like this in years past.
Posted by: Teresa | July 22, 2008 12:56 PM

Then why do I hear the right constantly draw parallels to other wars? Time horizon....nice spin on timetable.

Maliki can no more give a certain deadline for us to leave,
Posted by: Teresa | July 22, 2008 12:56 PM

Again the arrogance of the republicans is amazing...nobody knows better than them. Even the leader of that country.

Bill-the Iraqi people aren't the ones in charge of the WAR. The commanders on the ground are. They won't give dead lines, they just re-iterated that.

It's not right for Obama to go in there and try and set up timelines for a WAR that he is not in charge of. He's seriously over stepping his bounds. You know it's bad when some in the liberal press are even talking about it.

I can't say it enough. The cost of this war is VERY TINY compared to other wars. The cost of it pales in comparison to social programs etc that we spend tax dollars on here. Check it out yourself.

DD-exactly what is your experience in WAR? Did you move up in the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force? Obama doesn't have experience either.

Bill-we can see in the past, we can't view the future it hasn't happened yet.

I think it is very important that we get our troops entirely out of Iraq - as soon as possible. We need to do this because we need to prove to the rest of the region that democracy can work in that corner of the world without U.S. imposed martial law. We need to do this to allay all regional (and global) beliefs that our invasion of Iraq was an act of imperialism and/or colonialism, instead of the "regime change" that we claim it was. We also need to leave to permit the Iraqi people to exercise full sovereignty over their own country. Lastly, we must leave to preserve our own lives and treasure, and to remove this war as a cause of disagreement at home. We have been too divided for too long.
*
Having started this mess, however, we also have a duty to minimize the risk of damage to Iraqi's from our departure. I think it unfortunate that we have not attempted to enlist the cooperation of Iraq's neighbors to keep the peace - in the form of a regional organization like SEATO or the African Union. The Iraq Study Group had recommended this. I also think it would be insane, on the part of the U.S. and the Iraqi Government, to implement a time-line for departure without taking into account progress in security and self-government by the Iraqis themselves. All the same, Iraq belongs to the Iraqis; and they must choose their own destiny. If they want us out, then we must leave when they tell us to go. I just hope they are not making a mistake on the timing.

"the Iraqi people aren't the ones in charge of the WAR. The commanders on the ground are. They won't give dead lines, they just re-iterated that. "

So your saying that it IS a military occupation, and that Iraq has no real soveriegnty then? You're saying that the commanders on the ground aren't controlled by the civilian government of the US? So much for fighting for Democracy.

The civilian Governments of the US and Iraq are in charge of the war. The Iraqi government is in charge of it's soveriegn territory. Without their consent, we have no right to be there, unless we want to go to war against them as well.

Well, that's not what the Iraqi people are saying. They're saying they want the troops out by 2010 if violence stays down and things continue to get better as they have since the beginning of the surge. If things change they want the ability to keep a presence there longer.
Dabbagh cautioned, however, that any timetable should be flexible enough to accommodate changing conditions, "to ensure that we won't be attacked by any enemy inside or outside Iraq."
What the Obamessiah is saying is hard and fast deadline of 16 months, period. No flexibility for changing conditions on the ground and no help for the Iraqi government after the pullout. In short, he's proposing a finish line that AQI need only hang on long enough to make it to. McCain and the Iraqi government (and this is the party Sly totally ignored in her post) want to destroy AQI and leave the government strong and capable of taking over its security whether that happens in 16 months, 18 months or even longer.

Teresa...I spent 2 years on a fire base in Nam...and you're right that, like McBushs' service, isn't some ultimate knowledge of all things military. This "over his boundaries" is just more republican talking points. You don't think Maliki ever heard about time tables before? As far as the cost of war? We don't even have an idea of what exactly that is yet.

I forgot the best part HA!

Bush agrees to time 'horizon' on Iraq troop cuts - Yahoo! News

Yes, yes Bill we realize your two years in Nam makes you more qualified than McCain on military policy. Sure it does.

Jeff...If you will notice Teresas' post...she "asked" me what war experience I had. You didn't even read what I wrote. I said like McBush, my experience in Nam didn't give me the qualifications to say "I know how to win wars". Exactly what strategic planning do you think McBush was involved in in Nam to make that claim? Absolutely none. I also find it funny how you grow tired of me mentioning my service when you praise his...daily!

Bill- I'm impressed ! Thank you for your service.

The reason I like to ask that, is because there are far to many that make assumptions about war, that have little experience, but more importantly, very few that understand how rigid the CHAIN OF COMMAND is.

That might help you understand why I take great issue with those trying to run the war from HOME. Also, why I don't respect Obama's interference in this at all. I see it as showing a great disrespect, not only to the leaders in the two countries, but to all the commanders and their troops. Maliki may prefer to make deals with Obama, that is in no way a testiment to him. Like it or not, Maliki will still have to negotiate with BUSH.

There are negotiations that will take place regarding our leaving and our leaving some behind on a base. There were other countries that didn't want this either, and that didn't change the fact that we ARE THERE. All of those negotiations rest in the hands of the current leaders and Obama is a small fish weaving his way in a sea of large fish. He's a senator and he is showing himself to be a fool.

The above Liz Sly promotion piece for Obama doesn't even merit a response. "Dan" does a great job fisking how...
_________________________

And thus, the reich-wingers respond anyways. They can't even decide what they think!