Obama’s Iraq Minefield

Pajamas Media ^ | May 19, 2008 | Michael Weiss

[moderatewolverine]

Barack Obama has billed himself as the antiwar candidate. He claims that he sagely foretold of disaster in Iraq before the first troop was deployed, always felt the war was a mistake, and will positively remove all U.S. combat forces within 16 months if he is elected.

Upon closer inspection, this amounts to little more than a stump catechism, unsupported by Obama’s wavering talk over the past five years. Plus, his policy prescriptions for what to do going forward are not just out of date, they’re not even on nodding terms with reality in the Middle East.

In October 2002, the then-Illinois state senator addressed an antiwar rally in Chicago, where, describing himself as no pacifist, he affirmed, “I… know Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors… and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.”

Obama went on to campaign for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate as having been against regime change ab initio. He lost that contest to Chicago favorite Bobby Rush, but has congratulated himself ever since for, as he put it in a debate at Dartmouth College in 2007, “telling the truth to the American people even when [it was] tough…standing up against this war at a time where [sic] it was very unpopular. And I was risking my political career, because I was in the middle of a U.S. Senate race.” Left out of this courageous resume is the fact that it was in his proximate political interest to take the position that he did...

[equaviator]

“Change we can believe in”? PISH-POSH! What the hell is that? Is it meant to be so benign and PC that it tends to not mean anything at all or is it just another vague and opaque-yet-transparent campaign slogan by which people should have a blind faith in Barack Obama as our new president? And what “changes” can ever be seen to be believed until they have in fact, taken place?

[Grampa Dave]

President Bush Blasts Appeasers; Messiah Campaign Goes Ballistic

Hysterical Whiner, Hussein ObamaHamas cries/moans and screams that Bush falsely accuses him of appeasement and shouts, “I’m not an appeaser!”

Obama: "I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems, ....I will not weaponize space... I will slow development of future combat systems... I will institute a 'Defense Priorities Board' to ensure the quadrennial defense review is not used ..."

Then, there will be peace in our time without the evil republicans causing war!

My change is good for Muslims, Islamofascists, Black Racists, and Chrislims. $crew the Christians and real Jews!

[DocRock]

click the image to read the Scripture

[MNJohnnie]

You know the more you watch Obama the more you realize he is Jimmy Carter 2.0. His plan is to “change” back to the same national security, energy and economic polices Jimmy Carter tried, and failed, while President.

[equaviator]

I wouldn’t let him change out my toilet paper roll.

[tobyhill]

***U.S. combat forces***

The Rats are playing with words. What they'll do is leave the combat forces there but claim that they are there under non-combat roles. There will be 120,000 troops in Iraq throughout the duration of the next President's term no matter what they say now. Pelosi promised to lower gas prices if they got the majority, without qualifiers, but now all they do is blame the Republicans when gas actually increased at a much more rapid pace than under the GOP control.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

He claims that he ... will positively remove all U.S. combat forces within 16 months if he is elected.

You know, the Vietnam War started with a few thousand "non-combat forces" over there... Someone should tell BHO that just because you don't have combat forces on the ground doesn't mean you're not in - or starting - a war...