"I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq"- Barack Obama

[Orwellian_Ghost]

...

First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say "reduce," and not "fully withdraw."

This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strategy and take steam out of the insurgency.

On this point, I am in basic agreement with our top military commander in Iraq. In testimony before Congress earlier this year, General Casey stated that a key goal of the military was to "reduce our presence in Iraq, taking away one of the elements that fuels the insurgency: that of the coalition forces as an occupying force."

...

I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq. The strategic goals should be to allow for a limited drawdown of U.S. troops, coupled with a shift to a more effective counter-insurgency strategy that puts the Iraqi security forces in the lead and intensifies our efforts to train Iraqi forces.

At the same time, sufficient numbers of U.S. troops should be left in place to prevent Iraq from exploding into civil war, ethnic cleansing, and a haven for terrorism.

...

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051122-moving_forward/

[MadBadger]

1. Are you seriously quoting 2005?

[journalist3072]

2. Touchy are we, when any facts get in the way, and disabuse you of the notion that your candidate is

the anti-war candidate.

This was PRECISELY the argument President Bill Clinton was making, when he said the notion that Obama showed more judgement on Iraq is a fairytale.

[Seabiscuit]

4. It's their "cognitive dissonance".

They'd rather change the facts than alter their beliefs when confronted with the facts.

[jenmito]

6. Obama has to do the best he can to help clean up the mess your candidate got our troops into.

Obama DID show good judgement and said so publicly while Hillary (and Edwards) were busy voting for the IWR saying it would keep our country safer. :eyes:

[jackson_dem]

10. That is the excuse for it being a myth he has always been a staunch opponent of the war?

[jenmito]

17. He HAS always been a staunch opponent of the war. The votes he had to take to fund the troops

that Hillary, Edwards, and others voted to allow into Iraq do not make him any less against the war. How do you explain all the OTHER Congresspeople who voted against the war but then voted to fund it?

[jackson_dem]

19. He voted against funding the troops several times last year

Why couldn't he do it before? His vote was never needed to pass a single funding bill. He could have cast a symbolic vote against it like Kucinich and others did.

Obama has the best record, although not the best plan for the future for Iraq, on Iraq but it is not the perfect record he tries to make folks believe it is.

[niceypoo]

56. I explain them as being cowards

Voting for political expediency

[journalist3072]

21. OH....okay...that explains why he keeps voting to fund the same war he claims to disdain...and which

his camp said was responsible for Butto's death.

Thanks SO much for clearing that up.

[jenmito]

23. No. It explains why he keeps voting to fund the troops already there thanks to your "girl."

Uh, no they didn't. You're so ignorant. Here's what happened:


"Barack Obama had the judgment to oppose the war in Iraq. And he warned at the time that it would divert us from Afghanistan and al Qaeda, and now we see the effect of that," Axelrod said. "Sen. Clinton made a different judgment."
...
Axelrod was responding to reporters' questions about the Pakistan situation and whether it enhanced assertions that Clinton's foreign policy experience may make her more fit to serve as commander in chief.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/clinton.obama/index.html

There it is. He responded to a reporter's question, stating a fact-that if we followed Obama's judgement on the Iraq war, al Qaeda wouldn't have been as strong as they now are in Afghanistan. Hillary voted for the war. You don't like it? Too bad. Nearly 4,000 of our troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis wouldn't have died, either. All because of people like Hillary who allowed Bush to invade Iraq.

[Maven]

48. Why don't I ever see you criticizing Kerry for the same vote?

Funny, that.

[jenmito]

50. Um, I DID. I couldn't STAND Kerry in the primary last time. I was for Wes Clark.

Funny, that.

[Maven]

58. Yeah, last time.

But times have changed, right?

[maximusveritas]

31. Edwards didn't admit he was wrong on his IWR vote until 6 months after Obama said this

And even then, he was still calling for "enough military capability, combined with better-trained Iraqis, to fight terrorists and continue to help the Iraqis develop a stable country."

Hillary took "responsibility" for her vote around the same time with a similar plan.

Just a little "reality" for you.

[MadBadger]

3. Person who has responded to me...I cannot see what you are saying

For Obvious reasons

[Orwellian_Ghost]

9. Does this not apall you?

"What is happening in Iraq is about the security of the United States"- Barack Obama

What about the Iraqi children? The Iraqi people? No mention whatsoever.

Compare with the speeches of MLK that Barack likes to reference.

Look at the entire speech. Look at speeches subsequent.

Show me one that is substantively different and acknowledges the suffering of the Iraqi people.

Are you okay with this? This does not bother you?

Obama plans to continue the occupation, as did Clinton in form, and you think for a moment otherwise? If so show evidence. If not do you condone this illegal occupation?

[MadBadger]

16. You are using evidence from 2005. Obama's stance is withdrawing 1-2 brigades per month....

Have em all out in 16 months. Pay attention.

[Seeker30]

33. So he's a flip fopper?

[MadBadger]

37. Situations have changed in 3 years.

[Seeker30]

46. Like trying to win an election maybe?

[jackson_dem]

8. Bill Clinton was right. Why doesn't the media look at his record in 2005?

And the other years he has "opposed the war from the beginning." That implies a consistent opposition since 2002. That isn't the case.

[Levgreee]

12. He was always against the war

This is Obama's stance, put simply.
1.He was ALWAYS against the war, he always thought it was the wrong choice to go in. He thought it was wrong in 2002, in 2004, and in 2007.

2.He was NOT ALWAYS against supporting the war. Once the invasion had occurred and couldn't be undone, he was for funding the troops, and he was for keeping peace and giving time for the Iraqis to sort things out.

2. is not contradictory with 1..

Here is a quote...

"Us rushing headlong into a war unilaterally was a mistake and may still be a mistake...
IF it has happened, then at that point what the debate's really gonna be about is what is our long term commitment is there. How much is is it going to cost, what does it mean for us to rebuild Iraq, how do we stabilize and make sure that this country doesn't splinter into factions between the Shi'as, and the Kurds, and the Sunnis." - Barack Obama

This quote clearly explains his view. Rushing into the war was wrong. HOWEVER, once we were there, we had a responsibility to help rebuild the country, which means funding the war. So Obama was always against the war occurring, but considered it a poor choice to pull funding/pull out, for some time, after we invaded. After we had gave them time, Barrack supported a phase withdrawal.

This is a totally reasonable, consistent view, and personally one I agree with completely.

[jackson_dem]

15. The speech referenced in the OP speaks for itself

It is exactly why Obama has hidden his Senate record on Iraq.

[juajen]

38. Yeah, appears to be Hillary's positions as well.

She did not vote to go to war, she voted to give the President of the United States the power to negotiate, and that had to, of necessity, give the President the power he needed. She believed him and since has repudiated that belief; but, having said that, you don't plan on your President being a liar. He told the Senate going to war would be the last resort. Obviously he lied to a lot of people who otherwise would not have voted for the war resolution.

Her stance on the war is like Obama's. Pull out the soldiers gradually; protect the embassy and take into account Americans living in Iraq and the best way to remove them from Iraq. A very complicated business. It would be prudent if Obama supporters would stop with the war thingy. It doesn't wash so well. Only a few Senators refused Bush his Resolution, she was not one. Stop it already. Try beating another horse. Yes, "Fairy Tale" is an accurate statement for Barack's weird position on the war and his parsing of the two positions.

[jenmito]

13. Bill called Tim Russert and thanked him for asking him about his record re: the war votes

yet still claimed nobody questioned his past positions.

[rodeodance]

24. kid gloves from the media regarding Glitter Obama

[juajen]

45. Ah, another name, Glitterbama. I like it.

He really has a great name and face for caricature. I like Obama, I really do. Just think, when he gets older we can call him Oldbama. The combinations are endless.

[Tom Joad]

40. obamba makes references to ancient history when Hillary supported an illegal war in 2003

and rightfully so.
why shouldnt people quote Obama's support for that same illegal war and occupation in 2005??

[FrenchieCat]

44. When that was written, Edwards hadn't even "apologized yet"!

:rofl:

[ErnestoG]

5. Now lets take a trip to PRESENT REALITY, shall we?

Obama says he would withdraw from Iraq by end-2008

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1222671620070912



But hey, by all means, don't let me stop your hilarious trips to spinning the past. I like watching people in the sand box.

[jackson_dem]

11. No one has said Obama doesn't have the same position Hillary has on Iraq since 2007

[lastliberalintexas]

14. I hope the reporter made a mistake and Obama

actually said he would implement such a plan by the end of 2009. If Obama really did say 2008, well, LOL, I wouldn't even know how to respond. Does he think that the president-elect would have such powers? Has to be a reporter error.

[MadBadger]

18. He'd have troops out 16 months from the time he takes office.

[lastliberalintexas]

25. Which would be 2010

Even I can do that kind of math, which is why I posted the 2008 reference had to be a reporter error. Comprenez-vous?

[MadBadger]

30. Hey, I wasnt the one who said 2008

[Orwellian_Ghost]

20. That's your evidence?

Some mealy-mouthed reuters report with one-liners that don't even hint at any specifics?

That's horrible.

"He said he would immediately begin to pull out troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of 2008."

That means nothing and you know it. Stop with the sound bytes please.

Please cite for me your favorite Obama articles that are outside the mainstream. How do you determine a candidates position on the issues?

[ErnestoG]

26. You're bitching about a news report on his clearly stated position?

I'm sorry, what would you like in the future? A seance, or tarot reading perhaps?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

27. Please pay attention and read more on the matter

HANOVER, New Hampshire (AP) -- The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.


The candidates have vied with increasing intensity for the support of anti-war voters.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/dems.debate.ap/

I assume you support Obama. If he does not, if elected, bring about a FULL withdrawal of US troops from Iraq will you be involved in direct action against this hypocrisy?

If not are you okay with continued US occupation of Iraq and US political hypocrisy on this point?

Once you vote for it is your policy as well.

[ErnestoG]

39. I can read just fine...but can you reason?

For instance, would you rather pick nits with Obama - a guy who voted NO on starting a war with Iraq...or blindly follow someone like Hillary who still has not apologized for her war vote?

And one more time, want to take a step into current reality when citing Obama's positions, rather than defaulting to 2005?

[juajen]

47. He wasn't a U. S. Senator when this IWR was voted on, was he?

I'm not crazy, am I? I know my memory is slipping, but, surely, not that far.

[ErnestoG]

49. Sorry, meant to say this....

OBAMA WAS ALWAYS AGAINST WAR, WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST IT

DES MOINES — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama told reporters Wednesday he has been against the Iraq war from the start, countering questions from the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton in recent days about the sincerity of his opposition.

http://www.globegazette.com/articles/2007/03/22/state/doc4601ff91652a5568475410.txt



Which is cool, because then he wouldn't have something to apologize for - or in Hillary Clinton's case, REFUSE to apologize for.

Back to you, Ted....

[Orwellian_Ghost]

57. Okay

HANOVER, New Hampshire (AP) -- The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.


The candidates have vied with increasing intensity for the support of anti-war voters.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/dems.debate.ap/

Why is it you and others automatically go into knee-jerk reactionary mode when evidence is in front of your face?

You should examine that and challenge your assumptions. You launch into the predictable, "..or blindly follow someone like Hillary..." when your idol is questioned and you do so towards someone who does not support Hillary in the least. This speaks volumes to your conditioning.

Obama will continue US military presence in the region, in Iraq. Do you think otherwise? I'll make you a wager and give you long odds. Deal?

[ErnestoG]

61. Please see my post below, regarding no Dem candidates supporting a full withdrawal

That should settle the issue.

[snooper2]

7. Nice snippets

Anything positive you have to say to get Hillary INC. elected.....or just crap posts against someone who speaks the truth?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

22. What truths?

All I hear are platitudes. Since when did slogans become the truth?

Give me examples. Be specific.

Stop using the "better than Hillary" misdirection. I'm not a Hillary supporter. State your case. Use documented evidence (of Obama speaking the truth) or admit you are reciting campaign slogans.

[UALRBSofL]

28. Thanks for posting the truth

I will definitely be calling Arlington monday informing them of this newly discovered piece of information so that Hillary and Edwards can use it in the upcoming debate and run campaign ads on Barracks 2005 stance and his flip-flop issues of the war.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

29. That was in 2005 how dare you quote ANCIENT HISTORY

[Endangered Specie]

32. that avatar is hilarious.

:evilgrin:

[jackson_dem]

34. Yup

:evilgrin:

[Levgreee]

35. I'll repost this because you guys are f'n clueless, it's unbelievable

This is Obama's stance, put simply.
1.He was ALWAYS against the war, he always thought it was the wrong choice to go in. He thought it was wrong in 2002, in 2004, and in 2007.

2.He was NOT ALWAYS against supporting the war. Once the invasion had occurred and couldn't be undone, he was for funding the troops, and he was for keeping peace and giving time for the Iraqis to sort things out.

2. is not contradictory with 1..

Here is a quote...

"Us rushing headlong into a war unilaterally was a mistake and may still be a mistake...
IF it has happened, then at that point what the debate's really gonna be about is what is our long term commitment is there. How much is is it going to cost, what does it mean for us to rebuild Iraq, how do we stabilize and make sure that this country doesn't splinter into factions between the Shi'as, and the Kurds, and the Sunnis." - Barack Obama

This quote clearly explains his view. Rushing into the war was wrong, and he always considered that choice of entering the war wrong. HOWEVER, once we were there, we had a responsibility to help rebuild the country, which means funding the war. So Obama was always against the war occurring, but considered it a poor choice to pull funding/pull out, for some time, after we invaded. After we had gave them time, Barrack supported a phase withdrawal.

This is a totally reasonable, consistent view, and personally one I agree with completely.

[maximusveritas]

41. Don't bother

Truth and logic are not tolerated on this website when discussing candidates.

[UALRBSofL]

42. Except Most Of Americans

Don't want a timed withdrawl, they want the troops out now.

[Levgreee]

43. Obama, Edwards, and Hillary all support a timed withdrawal

and most people don't want an IMMEDIATE withdrawal, if it would endanger the troops or the Iraqis

[Orwellian_Ghost]

51. What do you mean?

Who are these "most people?" The Iraqis want the US troops out now. Does that not enter into the calculus?

Obama like so many others regurgitates the lie of American exceptionalism and the myth of sectarian civil explosion if the US troops leave. That is a bald-faced lie to rationalize continued US occupation. The only difference in such rhetoric as presented by Obama is in style.

Show me one single statement from Obama or his handlers that disproves this.

You're just obfuscating to avoid facing the hard reality that the candidate that you support does not square with the policy which (I assume) you do not support. Lot of that going around. And incredible contortions are required to keep up the pretensions for whatever reasons.

[Tom Joad]

36. yep, sounds like billaryobombaedwardian thinking. I miss Dennis already.

and you can guess where i'd like to put an unreduced "footprint" on obama for saying such rightist shit.

[johnnydrama]

54. um

which current candidate on either side has an overall better record on Iraq than Obama?

I guess i'm assuming you all are voting for Paul.

[Tom Joad]

62. wtf are you talkin' about?

i ain't votin' for no paul.
well, maybe ru paul, but he ain't a candidate.
just tellin it like it is.

[Tulkas]

52. NOVEMBER 2005!!!!!!

nice,



Clinton supporters just suck



As does their candidate

[Orwellian_Ghost]

53. Please elaborate

I'm not a Clinton supporter. So that aspect of your argument is gone.

Tell me more as to Obama's program to get all the US troops out of Iraq.

Remember when you vote the person you vote the policy. It's then yours and you have responsibilities that come with that.

[ErnestoG]

55. Uhm, NO Dem candidate still in the running is for pulling all troops

I wish they were, because that's my position. But I have make choices based upon what I'm given in this race. Here's what I see:

* A candidate who was always against the war, on record for saying he would have surely voted against it, and has pledged to pull combat troops from Iraq.

* A candidate who voted for the war, has never apologized for voting for the war nor repudiated that vote - and has pledged to pull combat troops from Iraq.

Who do you THINK I'm going to support?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

59. Gotcha'

What would Che say to that?

Take another look through a clear lens.

[ErnestoG]

60. Gotcha? When have I said anything different?

I am not a reincarnation of Che. And neither are you. We are faced with political realities that we have to choose from carefully to get the best results we can. Its called working with the real world.

Heard of it?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

64. And the reality is

that any candidate that is surrounded by DC advisers who embody the status quo cannot possibly be taken seriously when he chants "Change."

[Tom Joad]

63. No dem candidate is supporting that position, that's true, and that's the tragedy.