Jul 14 2008
Obama Grasps For Life Line On Iraq
Obama is looking as quite the lost soul. Based upon news reports Prime Minister Maliki would like to consider a timeline for the successful withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, now that Maliki believes victory is at hand, Obama is trying to claim is calls for surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda now make sense.
THE call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated, and that is needed for long-term success in Iraq and the security interests of the United States.
…
In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.
But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true.Â
What is this fool smoking? After a smashing success where Iraq is all but eradicated of al-Qaeda and the Muslim world is turning on it because of al-Qaeda’s atrocities on their fellow Muslims, nothing has changed? Obama really is full of himself to arrogantly think most Americans are not snickering behind his back right now. Last year a forced withdrawal over THE OBJECTIONS of the Iraqis and our President would have handed Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda a huge victory, keeping them alive and making them the future of Islam. Iraqis would have been slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands (instead of the tens of thousands al-Qaeda and their allies killed) and Iran would have rushed in to save the Shiite from another massacre.
Instead al-Qaeda is now the enemy of Islam – that happened because no one listened to you Senator Obama. Right now Iran’s influence on Iraq has been dealt a serious blow as Shiite Prime Minister Maliki spearheaded the destruction of the Mahdi Militia – something that would not have happened if we listened to you Senator. Â Right now al-Qaeda and the Taliban have a very limited and encircled sanctuary in the tribal lands of Pakistan – not something we would have seen if they had taken over Iraq and were heading to Israel, as they planned – because we listened to you Senator.
Obama is really an incredibly idiotic politician. Â He has been drinking too much of his own Kool Aid. Â No one is going to believe that, by ignoring the Senator’s suggestions for two years, all of a sudden our victory means the Senator was right all along. Â
Sorry Senator, but it was George W Bush who was right all along, and it is he who is bringing our troops home in victory!
Â
“But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true” Like what Senator?
All Obama has to do is stand up and say “argle bargle woobidy doo” and all his followers will stand up and cheer his eloquence. They don’t care what he says, they don’t care what he thinks, or even if he thinks. They are in looooove!!
I wish I bookmarked where I wrote it here but I predicted Obama would take credit for a U.S. victory in Iraq. If elected and Iraq was still going well the press would finally start covering Iraq success and of course it would be because of the “new good will in the world” after Obama was elected blah blah blah. We can’t let this guy get away with it.
“But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true”
And those factors would be the wonderful combination of arrogance, self righteousness and stupidity. Ahhh…..a politician among politicians.
His new mantra should be “What do you want to hear next? Chocolate cake for breakfast! ”
I guess this is why insurance exists … to protect us against the bad thinking/judgement of others.
I remember you saying that Mark78
McCain has long been a supporter of the war but not the tactics. He was a leading supporter of the surge that has now brought victory close to hand and has made it possible to be “careful getting out.” His judgement has been correct and he can rightfully claim the high ground.
Obama has been wrong about every aspect of this war yet tries to claim the high ground. He was never for victory; he was for humiliating Bush without regard for how that might be dangerous for the US.
Hopefully, Bush has created enough “hope and change” in the world that Obama will hamstrung by Bush Doctrine for the next four years.
Hopefully, Iran won’t commit similar atrocites against the US under Obama that they did under Carter.
[…] course, can’t understand why anyone would want to withdraw from Iraq. The war has been such a smashing success, after all. […]
Yankeeseven, o is not going to win.
Well there’s one thing Obama was right about, bombing Pakistan.
Here’s a little snippet from Bill Roggio:
“More than 100 terror camps” in operation in northwestern Pakistan
By Bill RoggioJuly 11, 2008 9:05 AM
Al Qaeda continues to grow its network and expand its capabilities in northwestern Pakistan, US military and intelligence officials told The Long War Journal. The peace agreements have given the Taliban and al Qaeda time and space to re-establish their networks, which pose a threat not only to Pakistan, but the West as well.
Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and allied terrorists groups, collectively called al Qaeda and allied movements, or AQAM, by some in US military and intelligence circles, has set up a series of camps throughout the tribal areas and in the settled districts of the Northwest Frontier Province. “More than 100” terror camps of varying sizes and types are currently in operation in the region, a senior US military intelligence official told The Long War Journal. As of the summer of 2007, 29 terror camps were known to be operating in North and South Waziristan alone.
hmm….
I said Nawaz Sharif was a terrorist and we now have a terrorist state
with nuclear weapons. Any dream that an awakening is happening there
is just that, a dream.
Looks like Pakistan goes onto the list, nukes and all.
It is imperative to the Democrats that Iraq be a failure and the failure be pinned on George W Bush. If they are going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, they will need to do so very early in any Obama administration, otherwise the failure gets stuck on Obama. What Obama’s failure is going to be is Afghanistan. I don’t believe he is going to be able to handle that situation.
He (o) isn’t going to be president. With all due respect, we really need to stop acting as if he is.
I was playing “devil’s advocate” and carrying forward what I think would happen under such a scenario.
Check this out over at Hot Air. It seems that Maliki’s comments about withdrawal were mis-translated and it is that mistranslation that everyone ran with.
The Iraqis have been trying to correct it for over 24hrs, but some places are still running the original translation and the reactions to it. Maliki does NOT want specific timetables for withdrawal.
CP,
I would not be surprised if Maliki set a trap for Obama – I doubt he wants him in the Oval Office “watching his back”!
Yeah, Maliki is pretty shrewed. He could have done that on purpose to tease Obama further out onto the limb.
There is also a big difference between Afghanistan and Iraq. The Taliban are basically the protectors of the worlds heroin supply. Iraq is a sovereign nation. The Taliban is what happens when you have tribes with access to as much money as nations have. You can buy private armies, train, and equip them. You can pay off politicians millions of dollars to keep them off your back. You can corrupt intelligence organizations.
The first step in getting rid of the Taliban is eradication of the opium poppy cultivation. Until that is done, the Taliban will always be around.
[…] AJ Strata: “Obama is looking as quite the lost soul. Based upon news reports Prime Minister Maliki would like to consider a timeline for the successful withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, now that Maliki believes victory is at hand, Obama is trying to claim is calls for surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda now make sense.†[…]
Obama’s real thoughts on terrorism, from “Free Republic”
Obama: 911 Attack Caused by “Lack of Empathyâ€
Posted on July 14, 2008
The cover of the New Yorker isn’t the only controversy, the article itself is very revealing. It mentions how unstable the young Senator was, as he threatened to physically kick another Senator’s a$$! It also has this little snippet of interesting information from an Obama speech on 9/19/01 speech:
We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.
We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.
BBC: Malaki’s Remarks were Misreported
Barack Obama based his editorial on Iraq in large part on the assertion by Nouri al-Maliki wants timetables for American withdrawal. Unfortunately, as the BBC notes, Maliki didn’t actually say that — although the fault really does not lie with Obama. In fact, the Maliki government doesn’t want date-certain withdrawal dates, and may not want a withdrawal at all
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/14/bbc-malikis-remarks-misreported/
= = = = = = = = = =
Is Obama already backtracking on troop withdrawal policy?
Seems he has drastically changed his website to reflect a flip flop on troop withdrawals in Iraq.
http://barackswhitelies.blogspot.com/2008/07/its-official-barack-flips-on-iraq.html
So why doesn’t Obama know how to speak and listen to Arabic ?
By his measure, we will soon be in hock to the Arabs, while he looks for alternatives.
I think what Maliki was saying was that while the time will come when American combat troops depart, he wants to keep a relationship there to help maintain security. I do not know why people have a hard time understanding that.
As for Obama, he is in way over his head here. Afghanistan is a whole different thing. The US used NATO and the UN in Afghanistan. One of the reasons the poppy crop has not been eradicated is that there are so many people among our allies there who do not support that mission. That is the problem with large joint missions, too many cooks.
I also wonder if sending in a lot of people would help. The terrain is so different that just keeping troops supplied could be a problem.
I heard a short report on the radio today about this and some Marine commander {I do not remember his name} said we need to stop depending on the Europeans who will not live up to their end of things and just send in enough Marines to do the job. And he was not talking about hundreds of thousands of troops either.
I was thinking on the day Maliki’s so-called withdrawal statements came out that the moonbats should wait a day or two to be sure that’s what he said and meant,but alas,they couldn’t hold their glee and stepped in the excrement again.
They’re like the people who yell BINGO! on a cover-all and don’t have one of the numbers.You’ve made an ass of yourself.Fools! Fools I tell you.