North Dakota Fishing and Hunting Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,949 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/po ... 129150.htm

OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
Comments: 482Read Comments Leave a Comment LONG VIEW: Barack Obama tours Iraq with Gen. David Petraeus in July, when he sought to stall any agreement for US troop withdrawal until President Bush left office.

Last updated: 4:10 am
September 15, 2008
Posted: 4:02 am
September 15, 2008

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,688 Posts
It looks like he is more concerned with looking good after taking office, and making Bush look bad, than he is with the lives of America soldiers. That would be a good image bought and paid for with the blood of American soldiers. What a low life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,039 Posts
Simply put Obama is a traitor to the USA

And to think some people want this loose cannon as Pres? WTH are they thinking? Next to him Hillary looks appealing as a Pres prospect.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,829 Posts
Sounds like the old dirty politics as usual. Where the "Change" he keeps talking about? I don't see any "Change" from the politics of old that he claims! :eyeroll:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,688 Posts
You sure don't hear much. It would appear that the media would like this swept under the run as fast as possible. The truth is Obama is willing to let more soldiers die just for his image. The man has no moral compass.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,688 Posts
I would like to see Obama get three to five for this. He doesn't deserve the White House he deserves the big house.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,247 Posts
Treason, plain and simple :sniper:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,734 Posts
*yawn*

If you are asking why this story hasn' had more legs, it's because it really isn't newsworthy, and the McCain campaign doesn't want to stir this hornet's nest.

Wondering why?

Well you see... everybody on both sides knows that the delays Obama proposed (yes I'm agreeing that he did) were to make sure the SOFA and SFA were handled properly and it would only delayed them a few months.

But the point is even if he had not brought it up, the troops still would not be coming home before the November elections. Because Iraq is not stable and everybody, John McCain, Barack Obama and even Bush have said that any attempt to leave is contingent on the situation on the ground. There is no conspiracy to stop troop withdrawals from happening before the November elections because its simply not a possibility on ANYONE's timetable; Bush's, Palins, Obama's, McCain's, the Iraq government all know we will be in Iraq for a while yet.

That's why all you hear are crickets.

That's all you will ever hear on this. Palin's campaign WILL NOT touch this with a 10 foot pole because they know it will just add to the negative press they've received for running the slimiest campaign in modern history.

Maybe you guys would be better off on some Palin threads, because I tell ya, she's sinking fast the more she speaks. ;)

After doing a bit of "looking" out on the internet, you might have found this rebuttal article, if any of you would have dared visit that site: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marc-lync ... 26939.html

In it, Marc Lynch points out many inconsistencies with the claims made in the NY Times article. The end result is that it's just propaganda trying to scare folks and misrepresent Barack Obama. It feeds into the common theory that some of the more racist folks out there are just looking for a reason to not vote for Barack Obama even though they know he's the better candidate than the Palin ticket.

You know if you really think about it, if Taheri was respected amongst the news and media world, don't you think more in the media would be reporting on this story? Instead, it's just a bunch of folks blogging about it because they are naieve Repug soldiers who don't know a credible news source from a gossipy blog. Let's just say, Taheri is no Mike Wallace. High school columnists are more credible than this guy.

This type of rag is not news people!! And neither is this Taheri guy. He's just a columnist.

He's not the objective voice like you so desperately wish him to be.

And this story is just more desperation from the Republicans.

Or so it seems to me.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,688 Posts
Bryan you have said often that you just like to debate. I have to tell you if this is your take you have to be the most partisan person I know. Hate to break it to you, but open minded you are not. Obama had no business making any deals in the name of the United States. Not for any reason. This isn't trivial like McCain can't use a computer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,734 Posts
Plainsman said:
Bryan you have said often that you just like to debate. I have to tell you if this is your take you have to be the most partisan person I know. Hate to break it to you, but open minded you are not. Obama had no business making any deals in the name of the United States. Not for any reason. This isn't trivial like McCain can't use a computer.
I'm not entirely convinced he made a deal with the ill intent in mind.

It has nothing to do with partisanship. How is my analysis not open minded? I'm open to considering both sides of every issue. I read Taheri's take on the issue, then I read Lynch's interpretation. The Huffington post article has more validity.

Many agree, including folks in McCain's campaign. They haven't exactly been raising cane trying to talk about this at every opportunity.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,688 Posts
I'm open to considering both sides of every issue.
Sure and I am ten foot tall and bullet proof. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,247 Posts
Ryan said
The Huffington post article has more validity.
Have you completely lost your mind :eyeroll: The Huffington Post.
You just keep insulting us with :bs: In doing so you lose more and more credibility with every keystroke :lol:
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top