6 Responses to Washington Post Raining on Barack’s Iraq Withdrawal Parade

1. Scott says: 1

   That’s odd. HUNDREDS of media people following him around the world, the central point of discussion is his Iraq plan, and no one asks him about his 2013 pledge?

   OBAMA RECORD
   Refuses to Pledge to Get Our Troops Out by 2013, the End Of His First Term
   RUSSERT: “Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq?”

   OBAMA: “I think it’s hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don’t know what contingency will be out there.

   What I can promise is that if there are still troops in Iraq when I take office — which it appears there may be, unless we can get some of our Republican colleagues to change their mind and cut off funding without a timetable — if there’s no timetable — then I will drastically reduce our presence there to the mission of protecting our embassy, protecting our civilians, and making sure that we’re carrying out counterterrorism activities there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don’t want to make promises, not knowing what the situation’s going to be three or four years out.”
   – From 9/26 DNC Debate at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire.

   Tim Russert where are you when we need you most?

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   July 23, 2008 at 5:43 pm
2. Adrian Soto says: 2

   Is it any wonder BO no longer wants to debate the issues. Take away his script and he stumbles and bumbles in his speech.

   But more importantly, BO does not have top level security clearance. There is no way that Mr. BO is or ever has been privy to the hard facts upon which military decisions are made on Iraq by our President Bush, military leaders and commanders.

   BO is NOT being provided any confidential information on Iraq. He very well may NOT be elected. And, as such, he is merely a citizen and Senator, but nothing else. Neither the military nor the al-Maliki administration will provide BO with the hard facts as they pertain to the reason the U.S. military must remain in Iraq for several years. But what is certain is what the generals have said openly; that the United States military will stay in Iraq until both internal-domestic and national security can be defended by the Iraqi military — this may take several years.

   The whole Obama panacea has turned absolutely sour for him. He’s in denial about the success of the surge in Iraq. But this flop, no 16 months end-the-war hype, is not any different than his seemingly minor flip-flops on other issues. This flop, however, is a major blunder. It may very well spell out a doom scenario for Obama. Saying he will bring all troops home and end the war while he’s saying we need to move more troops elsewhere and continue the war shows that he is neither a great thinker nor a leader of any kind. His inexperience coupled with misguided advise from his handlers has produced a disgrace moment for Obama.

   But let’s wait to see what Obama says on his return from his quick trip. At the very least he will make some pronouncement on his quick trip and his “refined” position, which will serve to distance him from his “we’ll vote for Ralph Nader” followers. His carnival trip is no less than a freak-show sample of his lack of experience, and certainly his lack of seriousness on foreign policy issues. For surely it takes great amount of time, thought and contemplation to make pronouncements on grave matters such as the war and troop withdrawals. On total he will have had only a few hours of face-to-face experience visiting Iraq and Afghanistan personages. Now his arrogance and self delusion will no doubt bring him to a very low point.

   http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/nextgenblog/

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   July 23, 2008 at 7:40 pm
3. Gregory Dittman says: 3

   There is a reason why Obama isn’t being questioned about such things on his trip even though reporters are following him. Obama is not holding press conferences or taking questions from real reporters.
   realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/obama_faking_it.html

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   July 23, 2008 at 8:07 pm
4. Mike's America says: 4

   Three excellent clips from that article Gregory:

   Poor John McCain. He’s so last-century. Still living in a world in which deeds matter, policies matter, what you would actually do with the power entrusted to you matters.
   …
   McCain’s approach is all so, well, cognitive. McCain thinks that reality is something that really exists, that has to be dealt with, instead of recognizing that we live in a Brave New World where highly paid symbolic analysts construct reality by manipulating symbols.
   …
   President Obama, if that’s our future, and his team of symbolic analysts will find out soon enough there are realities out there which none of his contrivances are going to be able to help him handle.

   More important, so will we.

   SHUDDER!!!

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   July 23, 2008 at 8:20 pm
5. wordsmith says: 5

   Here’s another great perspective, posted by Omar at Iraq the Model:

   Obama is lucky in that his host, Prime Minister Maliki, is also going through an election season. He’s even luckier that Maliki has been convinced by the close circle around him that Obama is going to win the American presidential race.

   The state-owned Al-Sabah quoted a senior official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject, as saying: “The change in the prime minister’s position has to do with his own perception of the political developments in the United States…Maliki thinks that Obama is most likely to win in the presidential election and that he will withdraw his country’s troops from Iraq as he pledged in his campaign.” The official added that Maliki sees that “he’s got to take preemptive steps before Obama gets to the White House.”

   This is why both men have appeared to be in perfect harmony recently; one lending generous support to the other. But this is not solid harmony because both men are acting like this due to mere speculations and/or flawed advice from their aides during critical moments in election seasons. Maliki, for example, knows very well that had Obama’s vision for Iraq been adopted two years ago, he wouldn’t be enjoying the position and power he does today, and the progress in Iraq wouldn’t have been achieved.

   The call for disengagement in the way Obama proposes (and Maliki cautiously endorses) is based on a vision that goes no further than the upcoming elections in both countries and thus an indicator of dangerous selfishness. The two men are gambling with victory against true enemies of their nations in the hope of achieving victory against personal electoral foes. The obvious confusion in Maliki’s recent statements forced government spokesmen and top officials to appear several times to correct or retract what he said. This indicates that much of what Maliki is saying these days is for personal/partisan electoral purposes and does not represent the strategy of the state of Iraq.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   August 1, 2008 at 10:12 am
6. MataHarley says: 6

   Was just reading that yesterday myself, Word. Thought it ironic that most poo poo the notion that alot of Maliki’s support for the withdrawal time table, with conditions, and media misrepresentaiton of his words as support for Obama when both candidates are planning withdrawals, is politically expedient in nature.

   Glad you posted it. I’ve been too busy to.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   August 1, 2008 at 12:02 pm