Will Obama Extend Occupation of Iraq Indefinitely?!


After years of demanding timelines for success, for withdrawal, retreat, redeployment, etc., President Obama’s constantly shifting goalposts might be pushed back again.

First he said he’d order the immediate withdrawal of US forces. Then he said he’d order the immediate withdrawal of combat forces (as if there’s US troops in Iraq on vacation and NOT involved in combat?). Then Obama campaigned on the completely arbitrary and unsubstantiated claim that he’d order all forces out in 16 months. Then it was just the combat forces (again, as if there’s US troops in Iraq just screwing around and not at all near combat). Once elected, President Obama took another 4 months to figure out/fess up that his 16 month campaign promise was just rhetoric that his political advisors created rather than an informed opinion supported by military advisors. As such, he just caved and said he’d continue the Bush Administration withdrawal timeline.

During the Bush years, we’ve been told that the President was moving goalposts. First the Bush Admin told us they’d be able to withdraw forces after the invasion, but an insurgency was bubbling, so many stayed. Then they told us that once there was an Iraqi governing council, troops would be removed, but the governing council didn’t quell the bubbling insurgency. Then we were told once there were elections, the troops would start coming home (20,000 did), but insurgency simmered more, and so many troops remained. Then there were the conditions-based requirements that had to be met before all troops could be brought home, and by that time an insurgency was well underway so security was needed, and more troops were sent.

The point here is that the American people have been told time and time again that troops would come home from Iraq for one reason after another at one time or another. Bush was mocked and ridiculed for “moving the goalposts.” President Obama has not despite his even more flagrant and deliberate misleading of withdrawal dates.

Now that the withdrawal has been underway for over a year (President Bush started it, and Obama is only continuing the Bush plan), it turns out that not only has boisterous opposition to the occupation completely disappeared, but so too has the memory of WHY President Bush kept US forces in Iraq after the invasion. Yes, there was a UN mandate to do so, but anti-Bush/anti-war people always ignored that. No, the reason was because removing US troops by a certain date would give an advantage to insurgents. It would tell them to simply hide, rearm, re-equip, and prepare to attack unopposed on a certain date.

Suddenly, the New York Times (which has advocated the unconditional and immediate withdrawal of all US forces in Iraq for YEARS now), sees that giving a timeline could be a tactical error. Color me shocked.

There is much debate as to whether any new insurgency, at a time of relative calm in most of Iraq, could ever produce the same levels of violence as existed at the height of the fighting here. A recent series of attacks, however, like bubbles that indicate fish beneath still water, suggest the potential danger, all the more perilous now because the American troops who helped to pacify Iraq are leaving.

Wow, what a radical new thought! Too bad the NYT and retreat advocates didn’t think of that earlier. It’s not like people weren’t pointing it out to them. It’s just that they didn’t believe it when it came during President Bush’s term, and now that Obama’s President…well, it must be true.

It’s not like Barack has ever moved the goalposts for withdrawal (err, um), and it’s not like he would ever break a campaign promise and keep US forces in Iraq longer if an insurgency breaks out. No, he’d rather leave, let an insurgency break out, and then re-invade, right? Or maybe, President Obama will choose to keep US forces there indefinitely. Why not? No one cares about Iraq as long as a Democrat is in charge of the war. Hell, they can even use Bush’s own plan for Iraq, and it’s still ok.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Paging Code Pink, Paging Code Pink…….hmmmmm, they’re not responding

Paging Daily KOS, Paging Daily KOS…….hmmmmm, they’re not responding either

Paging Cindy Sheehan, Paging Cindy Sheehan….ohhhhh the libs discarded her like a can of pop.

PAGING MSM….PAGING MSM………HEY, PUT DOWN THOSE CHEERLEADING POM-POMS!!! And Keith, get out of the cheerleading outfit !!!!

I heard that even though Obama was saying he would pull out of Iraq and change the policy, he would not because he would not want to be the President that lost in Iraq. This change is policy goes along with that thinking and makes sense. I am glad for him and our country that he made this decision.

However, Obama and the Democrats have painted themselves in a political corner. Their base is not going to like this at all and the GOP now have fodder to use in the next election. The Dems are making the mistakes the GOP did when they took power. They leaving their base and doing their own thing.


Will Obama Extend Occupation of Iraq Indefinitely?!

Only long enough to use it as a staging ground to invade Israel to steal Israeli land for a state for the “palestinian” vermin who, by pioneering modern terror techniques (all the way back to Haj Amin Al Husseini [after whom Barack Hussein Obama was named?]), made 911 possible.

Oceana has ALWAYS been at war with Eurasia.

“Hell, they can even use Bush’s own plan for Iraq, and it’s still ok.”

Don’t you remember when they started saying that Bush was following the B.HUSSEIN.Zero plan, as if Bush finally listened to them? They took credit for what Bush did, and even pretended it was their idea! I haven’t seen anyone do that since I was in grade school. They are acting like children.

There isn’t a shred of truth to most of what they say, but who cares. Zero and the Dems tell their lies, and I don’t blame them. I expect it of them, because I know they are immature spiteful greedy liars. What I am upset about is those Americans foolish enough to allow them to get away with such bald-faced fabrications over, and over, and over, and over again.

I guess there are a lot more children masquerading as adults than I thought.